Dovecot upgrade

[Sam Przyswa]

Thanks Ray for explain /your/ opinion in short "/you use Linux-Ubuntu on 
your own risk/" it's clear !

Sam.


Ray Leventhal a écrit :
> Sam Przyswa wrote:
>   
>> I just want you think just a minute about the SysAdmin on a network of 
>> hundreds users who can't catch their mails because "isn't where you 
>> expected" after a simple upgrade.
>>
>> Reply by "get a Mac" it's not what we are expected from a foundation 
>> like Ubuntu, perhaps you have to take care about the SysAdmin who have 
>> the responsibility of lot of users mail. It's for these reasons that I 
>> said Ubuntu it's not a right OS for production server and your response 
>> confirm my talk.
>>
>> Sorry for the disturbing.
>>
>> Sam.
>>
>>     
> Sam,
>
> This list is full of folks who would happily go out of their way to 
> assist you with a problem.  I've been the benefactor of this type of 
> benevolence often.  But as with anything that's community based, as is 
> the support here, how you approach a problem is going to greatly affect 
> how you're helped.
>
> You're doing a great job complaining, but without specifics on what 
> version you upgraded from and to and any differences in the config 
> files, you're not going to get much help here.
>
> For the record, we don't even know what version of Ubuntu Server you're 
> running...what version of dovecot was installed prior to your update and 
> with what version you're now having trouble. Is *this* the fault of this 
> helpful list or the Ubuntu developers?  C'mon now...be fair and real.
>
> IMNSHO, if you're a sysadmin, you're expected to be prepared to handle 
> issues such as the one you've barely described.  While I don't use 
> Ubuntu on servers (my personal pref is CentOS there), I do use Ubuntu on 
> all my desktop installations (though my 'day' job insists on MS). 
> Ubuntu server is a fully supported and righteous OS as an internet 
> services server.  There's nothing about it that could be referred to as 
> a 'bad choice' for a production server.
>
> Personally, before any upgrades, I simply make copies of any conf files 
> that I think /might/ be affected by newly upgraded packages.  This isn't 
> a complete failsafe, but it has saved my butt more times than I can 
> count.  Is your lack of preparedness and foresightedness the fault of 
> Ubuntu developers?  I think not.
>
> Perhaps you should contact Canonical or another consultancy and purchase 
> a paid maintenance agreement - they'll do your upgrades for you and you 
> don't have to worry about a thing.  One thing you shouldn't do, again 
> imnsho, is gripe and blame.
>
> Derek was right in saying this is Linux...when /you/ break something, 
> /you/ get to keep the pieces.  Typically /we/ will gladly help if that 
> happens...but you have to be a willing participant in obtaining a 
> solution that will work for you, not an adversary to those from whom 
> you're seeking help.
>
> @list - sorry for the noise...just my .02
>
> -Ray
>
>
>   

-- 
Sam Przyswa - Chef de projet
Email: samp at arial-concept.com
Arial Concept - Intégrateur Internet
36, rue de Turin - 75008 - Paris - France
Tel: 01 40 54 86 04 - Fax: 01 40 54 83 01
Fax privé: 09 57 12 27 22
Skype ID: arial-concept
Web: http://www.arial-concept.com