On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Graeme Fowler <graeme@???> wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 18:29 +0000, Andrey N.Oktyabrski wrote:
>> Yes, this idea (write any bug reports here) is insane. Theoretically, nothing
>> must be added in exim. Practically, I have all necessary patches. Adieu.
>
> It appears that Ted and I have teed Andrey off a little and he's now
> taken his ball and gone home.
>
> This prompts a wider discussion:
>
> If someone proposes something like Andrey did which breaks strict RFC
> compliance, or alternatively gives someone the ability to potentially
> damage their system as per bug 1062, do we need to vote on it?
>
> As few stepped in to the discussion spawned in either bug it struck me
> that the approach I took (reinforced by Ted, and gently disagreed with
> by Phil) was correct. Andrey's reaction has made me reflect on this,
> however the outcome of this reflection is that although I may have
> worded things differently I would have kept the same stance regardless.
>
> Is there a formal process of some sort that we should be adopting, or
> should we stick with the way we do already?
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
> --
> ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
>
As an outsider (not a dev, just a casual hacker) I feel that the Exim
code is easy enough to modify in unholy ways enough already, that
someone with enough cause and fortitude can easily make Exim break
RFC's, and keep the patches maintained themselves without Exim
maintainers involved.
I know I modify enough of Exim, and keep my own patch tree intact
without having to put things upstream (and I do some unholy things to
SMTP sometimes).
But here goes a thank you to Exim maintainers though, keeping Exim
modern, relevant, and clean.
--
Brent Jones
brent@???
