On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 07:28:54PM -0800, Sean Kamath wrote: > > On Dec 21, 2020, at 14:24, Aham Brahmasmi <aham.brahma...@gmx.com> wrote: > > For the defaults, I try to explicitly write some of them sometimes. I > > find this helpful because it is difficult for me to remember what the > > defaults are. However, I do understand that I run the risk of being > > caught unawares if the defaults are changed for some good reason. > > Trade-offs :) > > That is what I use comments for. ;-) > > a) Tells me what I *think* the defaults are > b) Reminds me I’m *using* the defaults > c) When the defaults change, makes it easy to find out why things break (if > they break, which they haven’t in recent memory) > > Sean
Which raises the question of knowing when the defaults change. Waiting until things *obviously* break doesn't address the time that things *silently* break. Silent breakage seems like a pretty serious security problem. Having the syntax pass OK is not the same thing as having what you need or want. I really don't see how any linter can accomplish such a complex question. Is my conf REALLY doing the right thing? Seems to. But maybe not. For a good example, a small mistake in smtpd.conf will run just fine, but with truly disastrous results. Chris Bennett
