On Wednesday 26 July 2006 04:42, Koen Martens wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
This message points to a project policy issue that I think ought to be
discussed and decided on by the council (you knew there had to be a
reason to have another meeting).
Should the SPF project give recognition to patches that the MTA author
has rejected (in this case it's not just this particular patch, but the
idea of patching Postfix internals period).
FWIW, i think we should not let what the author of the MTA dictates
be decisive in this. Although there might be perfectly valid reasons
to reject patches to the MTA code, i do not see why providing a link
to the patch is bad. We provide the list of implementations as-is,
without any warranty. It is up to the owner/operator of the MTA to
decide what is best for him.
Decisive, no, but if the author recommends an approach, we ought to at least
say that method A is recommended and method B is NOT recommended.
Scott K
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
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