On 09/12/2011 02:14 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > On 09/09/2011 09:41 AM, Paul Howarth wrote: >> Currently, the SELinux policy for dkim in Fedora (at least for F-15 >> and Rawhide) is in the milter module, whereas upstream has a >> separate dkim module. I'm looking at adding support for opendkim (a >> fork of dkim-milter), which has recently been imported to Fedora, >> and if I send a patch upstream, it's not going to get pulled into >> Fedora because Fedora is using a patched milter module rather than >> upstream's dkim module. Is there any reason for this other than it >> being a historical thing due to it being in Fedora before >> upstream? >> >> Paul. -- selinux mailing list selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux > > Lets work to get the Upstream and Fedora code merged. I have a > feeling others have worked on the Fedora policy that are using the > milters all the time, so I think our stuff is good. > > dgrift and mgrepl would no better then I. Shouldn't be a big job anyway. I'd just posted (upstream) a patch adding support for opendkim, which was recently introduced in Fedora, and I'd like to get that merged too. Paul. -- selinux mailing list selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
