On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Dick Davies wrote:
> My point was that I don't understand why you should mess with the base
> install - which affects everybody - for the sake of a package that not
> everybody uses?

The set of users interested in pf-spamd's functionality is likely to
consist of unix mail server admins.

The union of the set of unix mail server admins, and people interested
in spamassassin is quite large.

The union of the set of unix server admins, and people interested in
pf-spamd is smaller.

Spamassassin's daemon was called 'spamd' years before pf-spamd was.

NetBSD has not yet shipped a release including either in the base
system. NetBSD has included spamassassin's spamd in pkgsrc for years.

POLA: The majority of users expect spamd to be spamassassin.

I agree with Jim. I don't care what pf-spamd is called, or what module
it's in - don't call it 'spamd'.

P.S. Feel free to make sure it shows up in 'man -k spamd' though.

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net --> Unless you have a solution
when you tell them things like that, most people collapse into a gibbering, 
unthinking mass.  This is the same reason why you probably don't tell your 
boss about everything you read on BugTraq!    - Signal 11