On Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:24:50 +, Hinrik ??rn Sigur??sson wrote:
> I have a question about the ms-lite code you provided. I was looking
> at the logging plugins and I see that aside from perltidy style
> changes, the only difference between logterse and your logging/terse
> plugin is the defa
I have a question about the ms-lite code you provided. I was looking
at the logging plugins and I see that aside from perltidy style
changes, the only difference between logterse and your logging/terse
plugin is the default log level. Understandable. However, I'm not sure
why your logging/ffile dif
On Thu Oct 01, 2009 at 22:14:21 -0700, Ask Bj?rn Hansen wrote:
> Thanks for writing this; very interesting.
I think that the sample code ("ms-lite") ties into discussions
we've had on this list before about the difference between qpsmptd
shipping "random" plugins, v.s. shipping consistent one
On Oct 1, 2009, at 7:13, Steve Kemp wrote:
This document might be interesting to other users
of qpsmtpd:
http://book.mail-scanning.com/
It describes how I implemented and managed the setup of a
qpsmtpd-based filtering service which rejected about 10 million
messages a month at the peak.
