SPF failures nuke fedora-extras* msgs from redhat.com

Tue Aug 22 23:33:46 UTC 2006

On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 03:38:53PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:30:48PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Personally, I think we should drop perl-Mail-SPF-Query, or at _least_
> > modify our SpamAssassin package so that it needs to be _explicitly_
> > asked to do SPF rather than doing so by default if the package is
> > installed.
> 
> I disagree with you on SPF in many regards, but this part I totally agree
> with. Having a package behave totally differently depending simply on the
> *presence* of a perl module is bad behavior.

That's true of a lot of other (optional) perl modules in spamassassin.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060823/90687f0d/attachment.sig>