On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 03:38:53PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 07:30:48PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > Personally, I think we should drop perl-Mail-SPF-Query, or at _least_ > > modify our SpamAssassin package so that it needs to be _explicitly_ > > asked to do SPF rather than doing so by default if the package is > > installed. > > I disagree with you on SPF in many regards, but this part I totally agree > with. Having a package behave totally differently depending simply on the > *presence* of a perl module is bad behavior. That's true of a lot of other (optional) perl modules in spamassassin. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpyWmYbX2U88.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
