On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Graeme Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 18:29 +0000, Andrey N.Oktyabrski wrote: >> Yes, this idea (write any bug reports here) is insane. Theoretically, nothing >> must be added in exim. Practically, I have all necessary patches. Adieu. > > It appears that Ted and I have teed Andrey off a little and he's now > taken his ball and gone home. > > This prompts a wider discussion: > > If someone proposes something like Andrey did which breaks strict RFC > compliance, or alternatively gives someone the ability to potentially > damage their system as per bug 1062, do we need to vote on it? > > As few stepped in to the discussion spawned in either bug it struck me > that the approach I took (reinforced by Ted, and gently disagreed with > by Phil) was correct. Andrey's reaction has made me reflect on this, > however the outcome of this reflection is that although I may have > worded things differently I would have kept the same stance regardless. > > Is there a formal process of some sort that we should be adopting, or > should we stick with the way we do already? > > Graeme > > > > -- > ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim > details at http://www.exim.org/ ## >
As an outsider (not a dev, just a casual hacker) I feel that the Exim code is easy enough to modify in unholy ways enough already, that someone with enough cause and fortitude can easily make Exim break RFC's, and keep the patches maintained themselves without Exim maintainers involved. I know I modify enough of Exim, and keep my own patch tree intact without having to put things upstream (and I do some unholy things to SMTP sometimes). But here goes a thank you to Exim maintainers though, keeping Exim modern, relevant, and clean. -- Brent Jones [email protected] -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
