On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 December 2015 16:09:43 CET, Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
>>
>> It is irrelevant what our personal preference about doing modifications to
>> messages is (like the tag in the subject). The fact of life is that there
>>
Can we please lower the temperature on this discussion a bit?
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 8 December 2015 16:09:43 CET, Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
>>>
>>> It is irrelevant
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 5:00 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Friday, 4 December 2015 10:56:42 CET, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>
>> To be specific I will be enabling the following line:
>>
>> On-BadSignature tempfail
>>
>> within the configuration of OpenDKIM on our servers.
>
>
>
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 2:09:01 AM CET Valorie Zimmerman wrote:
> We *can* do this, we need to do this, and Ben doesn't have time to do
> all the work himself. So we need to do our part to help.
That's what I suggested in one of my mails. We need to tackle this as a
coordinated project
I've taken the liberty to remove the ad-hominem which you used. I'm not
happy with your approach to this discussion, but I'll try to stick with the
technical points.
There is active work within the DMARC WG, with first drafts being published
only *two months ago* [1]. My suggestion for
Hi all,
I'm going recount a personal experience here. I have my own domain
(BaloneyGeek.com) and I use Google Apps for Business for my E-Mail.
A couple of months ago I shifted DNS providers and took the
opportunity to properly set up E-Mail verification and signing. Using
Google's documentation,
On Sun, December 6, 2015 16:08:04 Antonio Rojas wrote:
> Hi,
> Kipi-plugins fails to build with flex 2.6. This is due to the autogenerated
> code in libpanorama containing //-style comments, which are disallowed in
> C90. Adding -std=c99 to the CFLAGS at compile time doesn't have any effect,
>
On 10 December 2015 at 12:04, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> I'm right now using msvc 2015 myself -- which gives other problems with
> other
> dependencies.
Microsoft now has clang (running on the Microsoft Code Generator as
well as LLVM) - maybe we could look into using that on
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Boudhayan Gupta wrote:
On 10 December 2015 at 12:04, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
I'm right now using msvc 2015 myself -- which gives other problems with
other
dependencies.
Microsoft now has clang (running on the Microsoft Code Generator as
well as LLVM) -