tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: postfix+ssl+sasl+dovecot

On 10/21/12 12:01, Martin Husemann wrote:
>>    Is there a policy for or against patching external modules for new
>> features?
> For usefull features it is possible, but requires to include a documentation
> update. Sounds like a general usefull idea, was there any upstream reaction?

   After sending the patch it took two minutes to get a somewhat angry
mail back about me not including a proper description of what the patch
should accomplish. (My bad; I sent a one-line description). I replied
with a longer description and I got no reply.

   With this particular developer, I tend to interpret silence as
"silent agreement", since he's *very* quick to reply if he disagrees.

   With regards to documentation updates; if you mean documentation of
what the patch accomplishes in technical terms, then there's no problem.
But if you mean a "user documentation update", then it's a little
trickier. The patch essentially adds support for something which the
user probably would assume was there from the beginning, and there's no
user interface change. I.e. it would be more correct to add to the
documentation a warning if it *doesn't* support it.

  Specifically: Postfix supports verifying certificate chains and it
supports SASL. The Dovecot SASL interface supports the client
certificate chain verification chain attribute. I, and others,
(incorrectly) assumed the two would simply plug together. With the
patch, they do. It, IMHO, makes postfix (better) live up to the
Principle of Least Surprise.

Kind regards,
Jan Danielsson

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index