spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Unity, organisation and information for themasses

2004-10-28 14:50:11
What is getting stupid is blaming Wayne for what he has done.  By creating
his draft he highlights the problems with draft-lentczner-spf-00, which
should not have been sent to the IETF.  IMHO

Maybe Wayne's draft should have been submitted to the IETF and not
draft-lentczner-spf-00.

Anyway, I did not intend to insult you.  Hopefully you did not read it as
such.

I am glad you are willing to work with people that you disagree with.  I
have found that it is good to have differing opinions on a project.  The
differing opinions often trigger new ideas.  As long as everyone is willing
to debate the issues and resolve the differences.  Usually the group can be
convinced which approach is best, but when the differences can't be
resolved, the tech lead will have to make the final decision.  Hopefully the
tech lead does not have an ego, else you have the wrong tech lead.  Even the
members of the group should not have egos, else they will never be convinced
their idea is not as good as someone else's idea.

Guy

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of James 
Couzens
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 4:23 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Unity, organisation and information for themasses

On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 01:00 -0400, guy wrote:
This is getting stupid!

Not quite sure what you mean.  Which particular aspect of it is getting
stupid?  Me voicing my willingness to work towards the same goal with
Wayne?  Do you feel we're going about this the wrong way?  I think the
idea of collaborating resources as regards the help, information, and
publishing of an RFC is precisely what we need.  Its quite clear that
there is a split within the community here as to the confidence in
previous leadership. 

The new draft (draft-lentczner-spf-00) was going to document the current
"v=spf1" (SPF Classic) that everyone is using as of 1 month ago, and maybe
still today.  It did not.  The new draft documented a new SPF, still
called
"v=spf1".  This is stupid!

This I agree.  What you are witnessing is "feature creep" in action.

  "v=spf1" should hot be a moving target at this
point.  Wayne can see this.  He documented what he believes is the running
spec for "v=spf1" which he based his code on (spf-draft-200406).  He has
said this over and over.  If the new draft was going to change spf1 then
it
should have been "v=spf1.1" or something, but not "v=spf1".

Saying something over and over doesn't make it right.  No one individual
here is going to be able to garner the respect and support of everyone
present.  Its going to take a unified team of us to agree on a couple of
outstanding issues (as I see it and others do) with the SPF1 spec.  They
are rather minute and could probably be quickly hashed out in a couple
of days.

I would like to state tho that technical discussion should really move
to the spf-devel list where there is far less disturbance and way more
focus.

Cheers,

James

-- 
James Couzens,
Programmer
                        ^                            ( ( (      
      ((__))         __\|/__        __|+|__        '. ___ .'    
       (00)           (o o)          (0~0)        '  (> <) '    
---nn-(o__o)-nn---ooO--(_)--Ooo--ooO--(_)--Ooo---ooO--(_)--Ooo---
http://libspf.org -- ANSI C Sender Policy Framework library
http://libsrs.org -- ANSI C Sender Rewriting Scheme library
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PGP: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A7C7DCF

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in Atlanta features
SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription, 
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com