Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:25:52 +0200
From:  Michael Stauber <bq (at mark) solarspeed.net>
Subject:  [coba-e:13959] Re: AW:  Re: sendmail question
To:  coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org
Message-Id:  <200809121725.53544.bq (at mark) solarspeed.net>
In-Reply-To:  <887433.36740.qm (at mark) web63804.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References:  <887433.36740.qm (at mark) web63804.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
X-Mail-Count: 13959

Hi Mike,

> Let's not.  Anyone who wants to make a certain changes can do so and they
> can recall what they make the changes to.
>
> 1) If we make too many changes as standard, it'll be too difficult to
> troubleshoot the platform down the road.
>
> 2) Different individuals have different preferences and requirements and
> are likely to submit theirs to be standard in bq, this opens a can of worm.

Those are good points and it's worth considering. However, this change has a 
very small footprint and no negative impacts that I'm aware of. But you're 
right: It's nothing that should be forced down peoples throat, especially on 
an already running server that may already have some third party SPAM 
filtering on it - or not.

Still, it may be a good idea to make it a default on new installs. And people 
who don't like the new Sendmail behaviour can then simply change it once and 
will never see it again. Thoughts?

-- 
With best regards,

Michael Stauber