https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826
--- Comment #26 from Henrik Krohns <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #22) > > We did one patch to the system to prove it worked before we went through all > the various functions one by one. I wanted the patch to be bite size and > reviewable. Who is "we"? It was obvious within seconds from looking at the commit that it's going to break things. If you don't have time to properly review things yourself, commit a branch or post a patch, so others can review it without breaking things. > To fix masscheck, a temporary stub for backwards compatibility until all the > functions are done should work like this: > > sub _check_whitelist { > return _check_allowlist(@_); > } The backwards compatibility should be for check_to_in_whitelist eval function, not _check_whitelist. And why should it be temporary?? Just leave it there! People can have local rules too which sa-update has no control over. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
