Talk:SquirrelMail

message: Good work BirdbrainedPhoenix! StephenFalken 12:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Update

message: Nutsmail is not "3rd party implementation of SquirrelMail". It is GPL abuse and maybe even violation. See their EULA
: It can't be violation because the source and binaries are the same, so they can't not ship source to anyone they ship binaries to. Their EULA is unenforceable because the very act of distributing a set of files which can only work with Squirrelmail means that their right to use Squirrelmail at all is revoked should they try to prevent Nutsmail's redistribution. In fact, such distribution implicitly licensed Nutsmail itself under the GPL.
: This is hardly surprising. Quite a lot of weenies fail to understand what the GPL obligates one to do. The important thing is not to give them any free advertising. Chris Cunningham 12:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  http://www.webhostingtalk.com/archive/index.php/t-420290.html . Yet they are trying to enforce their copyrights with images. Nutsmail tries to abuse GPL by linking copyrighted binary objects (images) to GPLed scripts. Theoretically scripts can function without images, but interface will look broken. All features listed in their pages are provided by some SquirrelMail plugin. SquirrelMail 1.4.x skins can't be implemented without lots of mofications in core scripts. I am former SquirrelMail developer and I do think that Nutsmail abuses GPL. It is hard to prove, but if they do that to my plugins or my copy of SquirrelMail, they will be stopped.(Tokul 20:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nutsmail 

message: How about this for notability: cPanel is the most commonly used web based web hosting front end in the world.
Every installation of cPanel includes Squirrelmail, Horde, and RoundCube by default. 
Why would you remove information about 1/3 of the webmail front ends for the most used web hosting front end?
SquirrelMail is also used, or even the default, in many other non-cPanel default webmail systems.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.51.14 (talk) 08:02, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  response to criticisms of squirrelmail wikipage 

message: SquirrelMail was last modified in 2012.  It has trouble with modern 2015 HTML emails.  It appears to have stopped being maintained and I'm here on the wiki because I wanted to see if there's a list of maintained alternatives; which there isn't.  Is one needed, or is the "See Also" section sufficient?  Also, the "External Links" section lists discontinued projects but SquirrelMail is not in that list -- shouldn't it should list SquirrelMail also? 74.10.5.213 (talk) 17:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The original developer(s) seem to have abandoned it, but there are still people on sourceforce making changes to the repository and the "Development version snapshots" are much updated. Would be nice to get a proper official version release and change log tho. As for alternatives, take a look at roundcube, very nice functionality and better UI than squirrel. 184.65.44.126 (talk) 17:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  End Of Life 

message: I would like to update and improve the article but am uncertain of the facts.
From the above unsigned comment:
 The original developer(s) seem to have abandoned it, but there are still people 
 on sourceforce making changes to the repository and the "Development version  
 snapshots" are much updated. Would be nice to get a proper official version 
 release and change log tho.
Firstly the article should contain in the introduction what a "project" means in this instance.  This should then clarify what constitutes an "official" status for software that the "original developers" have abandoned.  
Would it be accurate to say that:
 1. the Project consists of an informal group, with no resources of its own 
 (apart from those that are personally owned and individually controlled by its 
 members), who assemble and write code in the hope of indirect gain and/or for 
 ideological reasons, and  that 
 2. membership of the Project-team changes over time in an uncontrolled and 
 undirected manner and has no responsibility either jointly or severally for 
 the code or to its users?  
The need for this clarification is highlighted by the notability discussion above.  While SquirrelMail advertises on their home page for comments to be posted in the discussion, they have chosen not to clarify the current "status" of the project - which appears from the News posted on their site to have been "unmaintained" for the last three years. 
From this it would seem that the article should state that the "project" currently has no "official" status but is maintained by various aganecies and volunteers as legacy software.
LookingGlass (talk) 09:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement and accuracy

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on SquirrelMail. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110411052656/http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/opensuse/squirrelmail.html to http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/opensuse/squirrelmail.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:05, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified