why does noone (not even the vocal members of the qmail and djbns mailing lists) use the code as he wrote it?You wrong about "noone", but this isn't a point, so... Because people need "features". Most of such features can't be coded in reliable&secure way because of their nature. DJB prefer to not use such features, at least until somebody invent secure&reliable way to develop them. Anyway I suppose while DJB's software with few patches is less secure&reliable than without these patches, it's still much more secure&reliable than most of other software. AND - you've choice: use more reliable less features version or less reliable more features version. I think this is goodness.
BTW, I'm partially agree with you - developing really reliable&secure software sometimes require too much time. And this is one of reasons why I writing here - I wish to calibrate my feeling about this, to avoid developing reliable&secure email parser in next 2 years.
In reply to Re^2: Reliable software OR Is CPAN the sacred cow
by powerman
in thread Reliable software: SOLVED (was: Reliable software OR Is CPAN the sacred cow)
by powerman
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |