[Users] To queue, or not to queue was: Re: Error while sending....

[Pierre Fortin]

On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 08:41:36 -0800 Ian Zimmerman wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 10:43:04 -0500,
>pf at pfortin.com wrote:
>
>pf> I'm sure most (all?) CM users have run into this issue; especially
>pf> since CM has both Send and Send Later...
>
>I have not.  Please see my post in the fedora 20 thread to see why.
>
>IMNSHO, adding additional levels of queuing to claws in the attempt to
>make sending more reliable would be completely misguided.  This
>functionality belongs in a MTA.

Huh? Besides taking my comment out of context...  Whether I put a letter
in the mailbox, or leave it in my pocket to post later, is a user (MUA)
issue.  I know of no post office (MTA) that holds (queues) mail -- except
when waiting on authorization to deliver to the destination.

The "error while sending" has nothing to do with MTAs because the mail in
question has yet to leave the MUA (CM) on its way to an MTA.

In fact, if you re-read my comment you omitted, I argued against more
queuing by saying that "link busy" and "link down" are NOT meant to imply
it's OK to morph Send into Send Later -- just use normal queuing and only
hold mail when the user has explicitly stated Send Later.

As to your fedora 20 thread -- there, you admit to using a local MTA...
so what?  Physical location does not change the way mail works.  Just
because you don't see something because of speed, and a very reliable link
does not make MUAs and MTAs operate differently.

Pierre