I know...I know... This morning as I was leaving the house, I realized
I'd completely missed my April deadline. It seemed so realistic, way
back in March. Unfortunately, Real Life has not been cooperating
lately. I've recently started a new company and we've had a couple of
good months, which means I've had less free time. Other volunteer
activities have been occupying my weekends. On top of all that, pesky
bugs have been popping up in the 3.1 series, which have forced the
releases of 3.1.6, 3.1.7 and (soon) 3.1.8.
Yeah, yeah, I know, we all have jobs, we all have lives, talk is cheap,
there's no such thing as a good excuse... sorry, sorry. :) I _was_
hoping to get 3.1.8 released today but since it's 10:30 and I'm still at
my office, I guess that's not going to happen. Believe me, I'm as tired
of typing "it's coming in the next version" and "real soon now" as you
are of reading it. :) I often recall a Douglas Adams quote: "I love
deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they make as they fly by."
You might just accuse me of teasing you even more, but here's a status
update:
Version 3.1.8:
Done and tested, I just need to send it to one person for
confirmation. Once that happens (hopefully only a few days), I'll
release it.
Version 4.0.0:
Core Code: Nearly in feature-freeze (it's reached this point
several times already but I've received several good suggestions and
added them anyway). I have only one more thing to add -- a flag to
explicitly control spamdyke's relay protection.
Utilities Code: Two utilities need to be created, one to convert
an existing graylist directory structure from the old (pre-4.0 layout)
to the new layout and one to convert a graylist directory structure from
the new layout to the old one (in case anyone wants to go back to a
previous version of spamdyke).
Test scripts: I've already added 138 new scripts to exercise new
or changed features. It's difficult to be specific about the number of
scripts left to add -- some new features require only one script, others
require 20. I estimate 200-300 scripts remain to be written.
Documentation: Lots of updates are needed. I've added 55 new
flags, changed the behavior/syntax of 9 flags and removed 9 flags. Even
the "configure" script has 3 new flags.
Overall game plan:
Bug fixes in the current version are always priority #1.
Finish adding the last feature (the relaying flag) and hope I (or
others) don't think up anything else to add.
Finish writing the test scripts and fix the bugs they reveal.
Update the UPGRADING.txt file with instructions on how to convert a
3.1.x configuration file to provide the same behavior on 4.0.0.
Call for beta testers and see if anyone is dumb^H^H^H^H brave enough
to volunteer. Finding none, I will (as usual) subject my own unwitting
users to a beta test for a week or so.
Finish updating the documentation and fix any new bugs.
Release!
Immediately start working on 4.1 (recipient validation).
So... mid-May for sure. :)
-- Sam Clippinger
Michael Colvin wrote:
> Not to be a pushy little whinner...But, it is May now. :-) You've got so
> many new toys in the new version that you've been teasing us with, and then
> teasing that you're trying to get it out in April. :-)
>
> Just kiddin'.
>
> Michael J. Colvin
> NorCal Internet Services
> www.norcalisp.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam
>> Clippinger
>> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 7:15 PM
>> To: spamdyke users
>> Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] DENIED_IP_IN_(CC)_RDNS
>>
>> Version 4.0.0 has the ability to use different configuration
>> files depending on the remote server's IP address and/or rDNS
>> name (as well as the sender and recipient addresses). That
>> should provide the flexibility you're looking for.
>>
>> -- Sam Clippinger
>>
>> Marcin Orlowski wrote:
>>
>>> Sam Clippinger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I can't speak for anyone else, but those two filters have
>>>>
>> been very
>>
>>>> good for my users. On a typical day, 30-60% of all
>>>>
>> connections to my
>>
>>>> server are blocked with DENIED_IP_IN_CC_RDNS. Another 5-20% are
>>>> blocked by DENIED_IP_IN_RDNS. I've had to whitelist a few IP
>>>> addresses with bad rDNS names but that's been very rare so
>>>>
>> far (less than 5 total).
>>
>>>> However, servers with larger user populations and more
>>>>
>> international
>>
>>>> correspondence might have different experiences.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Let me request a feature to bypass DENIED_IN_(CC)_RDNS if "to:"
>>> matches given pattern. I'd then be able to bypass all the crap to
>>> potentially complaining customers and let them filter it by
>>> themselves, w/o the risk of flooding others with this.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> spamdyke-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> spamdyke-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spamdyke-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>
_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
