https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6903
Christer Mjellem Strand <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #9 from Christer Mjellem Strand <[email protected]> --- Really sorry to keep doing this, but.. While going through the revision history for this file, I noticed this: <http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=991855> IOW, Runbox has been removed from the list once before, for no longer offering free accounts. The question at hand is: Should the list include domains from providers who do not offer permanently free accounts, but from which accounts are free during a limited time trial period? I'm inclined to opine that it should, since 30 days is plenty of time to abuse an account. OTOH, providers may have stricter monitoring of outgoing messages from trial accounts (as is the case with at least FastMail). I ask not just for Runbox, but also for FastMail, who moved to the same model last year, and offer a great number of domains to choose from, many of which are already in the list (I can procure a complete updated list - it rarely changes anymore). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
