Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Wed, 7 Mar 2007 21:43:13 -0500
From:  "Brian N. Smith" <brian (at mark) nuonce.net>
Subject:  [coba-e:09006] Re: Patch to aliasing code
To:  <coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org>
Message-Id:  <009801c7612b$868639a0$1e64a8c0 (at mark) nuonce.net>
References:  <200702260739.l1Q7drkK008815 (at mark) hosting1.netvictory.net> <20070226074738.M3431 (at mark) scargo.nl>
X-Mail-Count: 09006

Taco,

I have submitted this.  I am sorry for the delay.  I would love to say 
I have all of the time in world, but lately life has been keeping me 
busy.

As far as your comment about Hisao.  I wonder too, I haven't talked 
with him for months.  Not sure where he went to.

BTW, if I could, I would give you SVN access, but I do not have that 
ability.

-Brian


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Taco Scargo" <taco (at mark) scargo.nl>
To: <coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:47 AM
Subject: [coba-e:08946] Patch to aliasing code


> Hi guysm
>
> I cam across a bad design by my former colleagues which I would like 
> to
> correct with the patch below.
>
> Issue:
>
> When adding/modifying an web or e-mail alias, the code checks wether 
> the alias
> is already in use (by another site). When adding an e-mail alias 
> that is in
> use as a webalias by another site, BQ would refuse it, but this is 
> valid as
> long as there are no mail-aliases defined.
>
> The same for adding a webalias. Have a look at the code I removed 
> and the
> comments above it. The reasoning just does not make sense.
> It is completly valid to have 10 websites for web access and just 
> have one of
> the receive the mail for these domains.
>
> I would be happy if Hisao or Brian could check this into CVS. Is 
> Hisao still
> alive ? I haven't seen any responses to earlier mails regarding 
> patches I
> submitted.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Taco
>
> diff -u /usr/sausalito/handlers/base/vsite/unique.pl.orig
> /usr/sausalito/handlers/base/vsite/unique.pl > /tmp/unique.pl.patch
> --- /usr/sausalito/handlers/base/vsite/unique.pl.orig 2007-02-26
> 08:28:18.000000000 +0100
> +++ /usr/sausalito/handlers/base/vsite/unique.pl 2007-02-26 
> 08:37:32.000000000
> +0100
> @@ -83,24 +83,7 @@
>         {
>         'webAliases' => $search_regex
>         });
> - #
> - # also verify that another site isn't using this
> - # as an email alias.  It doesn't really make any sense to
> - # allow one site to use a name as a web alias and another
> - # to use it as a mail alias, because it foobars DNS.
> - #
> - my @mail_oids = $cce->findx('Vsite', {},
> - {
> - 'mailAliases' => $search_regex
> - });
> - #
> - # when checking for mail aliases need to handle the case
> - # when one site is found, because it is legal for the same
> - # site to use an alias for both email and web
> - #
> - if ((scalar(@oids) > 1) || (scalar(@mail_oids) > 1) ||
> -     ((scalar(@mail_oids) == 1) &&
> -      ($mail_oids[0] != $cce->event_oid()))) {
> + if (scalar(@oids) > 1) {
>  push @used_web_aliases, $alias;
>  }
>  }
> @@ -128,22 +111,7 @@
>         'mailAliases' => $search_regex
>         });
>
> - #
> - # also verify another site isn't using this as a web alias
> - # same reasoning as above for web aliases
> - #A
> - my @web_oids = $cce->findx('Vsite', {},
> - {
> - 'webAliases' => $search_regex
> - });
> - #
> - # when checking for web aliases need to handle the case
> - # when one site is found, because it is legal for the same
> - # site to use an alias for both email and web
> - #
> - if ((scalar(@oids) > 1) || (scalar(@web_oids) > 1) ||
> -     ((scalar(@web_oids) == 1) &&
> -      ($web_oids[0] != $cce->event_oid()))) {
> + if (scalar(@oids) > 1) {
>  push @used_mail_aliases, $alias;
>  }
>  }
>
>
>
>