https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6645
--- Comment #11 from [email protected] 2011-08-07 16:52:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > I agree with Stussy, except for the fact I believe SA is an e-mail > categorizing > software, not an RFC compliance tester. > > I'm not a PMC, anyway my belief is that SA could apply some work-around > technique to the problem *afflicting qmail-scanner*, iff numbers are large > enough to justify the risk of possibly introducing a weakness in the > chain-of-trust detection alghoritm *and* the qmail-scanner people is unwilling > to fix their bits. Otherwise, there is either no evident reason to do it > and/or > not enough numbers to justify it. > > Please also note that the SA userbase is large, consisting of lots of > different > SA versions running. Updating SA may not effectively fix the problem for a > very > long time, while it is probably much more efficient to fix it at the source. > > If I was a PMC, I would probably had closed this bug as INVALID... I'm trying to make the problem clear to the qmail-scanner developer since your suggestion in comment 4 that it might not only affect spamassassin. But I don't think that the idea that in the meantime - until all qmail-scanner's are fixed, if the developer accepts it as a bug of his software - spamassassin should have a "workaround" is crazy, because it HAS a workaround, but that workaround is broken ... and so spamassassin is buggy. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
