Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:28:03 -0600
From:  "Rodrigo Ordonez Licona" <rodrigo (at mark)>
Subject:  [coba-e:10926] Re: CBQ Dieing WAS ] Re: yum Query
To:  <coba-e (at mark)>
Message-Id:  <200710222030.l9MKU4EJ004790 (at mark)>
In-Reply-To:  <03cd01c814db$894e42e0$0202fea9@CIIC2>
X-Mail-Count: 10926

Same here with us,

Things have run smoothly for over 8 months now, (pop3 problems)

And the system is stable as never. However spammers have behaved too.

Probably more bells and whistles on the marketing side of Bluquartz are
Needed.. That I do agree

Rodrigo O

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Aronoff [mailto:ma (at mark)] 
Sent: Lunes, 22 de Octubre de 2007 12:44 p.m.
To: coba-e (at mark)
Subject: [coba-e:10924] Re: CBQ Dieing WAS ] Re: yum Query

Gerald Wrote:

>> Is BQ slowly dying? I thought lots of people where using it.  
>> Are there any
>> good options other than BQ? 

> We are still selling a lot of CBQ servers.
> Low list traffic could mean less problems...

>From my perspective BQ is 1000% more stable than any Cobalt server ever
was!!!  CentOS is well patched through Yum so dealing with each new exploit
on and emergency basis is a thing of the past. Where the cobalt community
had to come up with solutions while Cobalt/Sun took months or years to patch
things, CentOS is a very mature and stable widely used server distribution
of Linux that means patches are generally faster and better.

And while the Cobalt base GUI portion of still has some issues, they have
largely been patched into submission and/or are easy to work around.

I currently have 4 BQ servers and am adding 2 more here soon. I have a fully
documented install where I remember to do all the tweaks and change for the
way I like things and I can bring up a fully patched server in under 30 min
totally ready to go.

In my opinion things here are slow because there is not much to discuss. 

M Aronoff - Out