Dan Mahoney:
> I?ve been on the project for a few days. I?m feeling a lot of
> vitriol here. Please don?t shoot the messenger.
The natural response would be to push back - fix the milter (the
root cause of the problem) instead of the code that talks to it.
> >> Either way, this is documentation that could go in both a postfix and
> >> opendmarc doc.
> >
> > What documentation? I will update Postfix documentation when there
> > is a Postfix change, or when the documentation is inaccurate. It's
> > not feasible to document issues with third-party milters.
>
> "Note: some milters can cause mail to go to the Hold queue. If
> configuring a new milter please make sure this is your desired
> behavior." was the entirety of what I was thinking.
Instead of documenting the current state, I think it is better to
a) fix the milter, or if that does not work out, to b) add a
workaround feature to Postfix code. My impression is that we are
still in stage a).
> > If one Milter implementation unilaterally changes the meaning of
> > 'quarantine' then I will be grateful if someone fixes that in the
> > Milter so that it becomes consistent with the protocol spec.
>
> I don't have the history there. I'm detecting there is some, but
> I just want to make better code.
I would be gratefuil if you can get this addressed in the Milter.
Please keep us informed of what happens. If it really does not work
out then we can look into b) add a feature to Postfix stable releases.
But the bar is high for changes to stable releases.
Wietse
