------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=837 Nigel Metheringham <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|Exim 4.72 |Exim 4.73 Phil Pennock <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #1 from Phil Pennock <[email protected]> 2010-06-06 04:08:32 --- With external inclusions and fragments, it's already possible to create very confusing configurations. This feature would make it even harder to read and determine what various file fragments do and what the effect is. As I see it, this would only help if there are, for some cases, two different definitions which might be included. I strongly recommend that in such a case the decision be made deterministically by a build script, which can spew warnings and provide one solid fixed configuration for deployment. Anything else would just lead to a running MTA where you can't determine what's actually happening, as all the log statements would just give a name for the transport/whatever, and those names would no longer be sufficient to diagnose what configuration is in use. I'm going to close the bug as WONTFIX at this time. If you can provide a compelling argument for why such a facility is needed, please do re-open, but absent such argument I would argue against implementing this. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
