[Possible Spam] Re: [Possible Spam] Re: SPF failures nuke fedora-extras* msgs from redhat.com

Tue Aug 22 19:38:53 UTC 2006

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.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>