[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: perl-Mail-:SPF should obsolete perl-Mail-SPF-Query

On 21/09/09 19:16, Warren Togami wrote:
On 09/21/2009 11:41 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 21/09/09 16:33, Warren Togami wrote:
Should we obsolete and remove perl-Mail-SPF-Query? Apparently
perl-Mail-SPF obsoleted perl-Mail-SPF-Query ~3 years ago.

Really? Says who? It certainly doesn't provide any implementation of

spampd owned by thias is the only package according to repoquery that
requires perl(Mail::SPF::Query).

What is to be gained by doing this other than a miniscule saving in
mirror space and metadata size?


What stake do you have in defending software that hasn't been developed
in 3+ years?

I'm sure there's plenty of software in Fedora that hasn't been developed in 3+ years, sometimes as in this case because it's dead upstream and sometimes because it's simply stable and doesn't need fixing.

Other than the fact that I did the original upstream packaging for this module, I have no particular attachment to this package. If it goes from Fedora I won't miss it myself.

I fully accept that any new development of perl code using SPF will use Mail::SPF and not Mail::SPF::Query. I see that you're removing the (optional) SPF functionality from spampd, which is OK because it passes mail through SpamAssassin, which has its own SPF code, so there won't be any user of Mail::SPF::Query in Rawhide. There may still be out-of-distribution code such as the original sendmail-spf-milter that uses it though.

On 21/09/09 23:37, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 09/21/2009 05:06 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
> spampd was requiring perl(Mail::SPF::Query) for no good reason.
> Rather than require Mail::SPF I've stripped that artificial
> requirement because SPF is actually rather useless. So now nothing
> in Fedora requires perl(Mail::SPF::Query).

Since SPF is as you say "rather useless", why aren't you trying to get rid of Mail::SPF too?

> I'm soon blocking perl-Mail-SPF-Query from rawhide. It is true that
> perl-Mail-SPF does not provide perl(Mail::SPF::Query). perl-Mail-SPF
> will obsolete perl-Mail-SPF-Query to ensure its removal but not
> "provide" for the old package.
> Any objections?

I'm not objecting to perl-Mail-SPF-Query being blocked from Rawhide and marked as a dead package, given its maintainer's consent. I am, however, curious as to just why you've singled out this particular package out of the myriad of legacy code that's in the distribution and doing no harm. Or is there some big issue with it that I'm not aware of?

I'm also not sure about the merits of having perl-Mail-SPF obsolete perl-Mail-SPF-Query. Why do we need to remove something from users' systems that (a) they may be actually using, and (b) does not in any way conflict or cause problems for the upgraded distribution?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]