Am 24.02.21 um 23:29 schrieb Wietse Venema:
j...@nunyuh.net:
I've purposefully held off on responding to any of this but if the
devs\list-owners are fine with the community converting this into a
forum about race + software & computer terms, albeit temporarily, then
fine - let's "damn the
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 4:58 PM Emmett Culley
wrote:
>
> On 2/24/21 12:40 PM, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> >> Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
> >> better than black. Instead, Postfix prefers 'allowlist', 'denylist',
> >>
"...other folks could go take a hike..."
Indeed they could - just as they can now...
"So, whose code is it?"
The 'they' that own it...in this specific case, my guess is Wietse...
"...who organically came to the terms white/black list..."
Or really believe that context truly matters which
"the right of devs to use whatever nomenclature they desire"
That's it. That's the thing. I suppose if it was my code and I wanted
to make that change other folks could go take a hike.
So, whose code is it?
If it were my code and I were dead (interesting prospect), I would try
to lay
"...should we not consider the class of disallowed out there to be
inherently persecuted..."
Why? Are you suggesting the devs try and precog, Minority Report style,
what nomenclature might in the future be at issue?
“Variable naming is a wide ranging philosophical issue”
It really shouldn’t
If we were to change the nomenclature to something like "disallowed" and
"allowed", should we not consider the class of disallowed out there to
be inherently persecuted? Are we looking at choosing variable names
with no corresponding representation in the dictionary (just in case)?
var
"Let's not do that."
I would wholeheartedly agree...and that was actually my point.
I view this forum as being a place for all things Postfix but only
Postfix - not the possible root-cause nor philosophies behind why
nomenclature might be the way it is.
None of us enjoys a universal right
j...@nunyuh.net:
> I've purposefully held off on responding to any of this but if the
> devs\list-owners are fine with the community converting this into a
> forum about race + software & computer terms, albeit temporarily, then
> fine - let's "damn the torpedos & full steam ahead" this baby
I've purposefully held off on responding to any of this but if the
devs\list-owners are fine with the community converting this into a
forum about race + software & computer terms, albeit temporarily, then
fine - let's "damn the torpedos & full steam ahead" this baby and get to
work...
We
On 2/24/21 12:40 PM, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Wietse Venema wrote:
Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
better than black. Instead, Postfix prefers 'allowlist', 'denylist',
and variations on those words.
We had a late start, but it seems Newspeak
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Wietse Venema wrote:
Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
better than black. Instead, Postfix prefers 'allowlist', 'denylist',
and variations on those words.
We had a late start, but it seems Newspeak will be established until 2050
as
Michael Grimm:
> /usr/local/sbin/postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf:
> unused parameter: respectful_logging=no
I tested the code with the name cut-and-pasted and did not notice
that the name had a typo.
postfix-3.6-20210224 is uploaded to ftp/www.porcupi
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 08:31:25PM +0100, Michael Grimm wrote:
> mail> postfix reload
> /usr/local/sbin/postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf:
> unused parameter: respectful_logging=no
> postfix/postfix-script: refreshing the Postfix mail system
That appears to be
On 24 Feb 2021, at 10:12, Wietse Venema wrote:
> The following is from the postfix-3.6-20210221 release notes.
> Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
> better than black. Instead, Postfix prefers 'allowlist', 'denylist',
> and variations on those words.
Thank you!
[Sorry Wietse, this mail should have gone to the ML instead to your personal
mail address]
Wietse Venema wrote:
> The following is from the postfix-3.6-20210221 release notes.
I did upgrade to this version today.
> To keep logging the old form, make the setting "respectful_logging =
> no"
Any chance of terminating this thread -- my disk is only a terabyte.
Programmers can call a variable or label whatever they want to. It's one of
their perks.
And they can change it if they want to. But it's often helpful for the users
if they make the change backward compatible,
--
Glenn
On 24 Feb 2021, at 12:51, John Dale wrote:
What are we going to do about actual light and actual dark?
There's no reason to stop using "black" and "white" when referring to
things that are in an actual optical brightness sense black (or very
dark) or white (or very light.)
As Wietse said:
Agreed — While my initial gut reaction is jump in and express myself
directly about this change, my better angel (yes, I think I have only
one) compels me to understand (a) this forum is not the right place to
air any perspective for or against this change; (b) it’s done so get
on with it.
The link is in your mind (not mine) and certainly not in non-sentient
software code. Scrubbing language only serves to define and sharpen the
distinction in your mind (not mine) and confuse historical development
of code (this language policing will be committed to some source repo
somewhere
As 'allowlist' and 'denylist' are self-explaning, this is a valuable change as
it will save time for newbies in future. Independent if any racist background
or not.
Thank you, Wietse!
Am 24. Februar 2021 19:43:22 MEZ schrieb Kenneth Irving :
>Completely agree with Jaroslaw. This is absolutely
+1
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org on
behalf of Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Sent: February 24, 2021 1:51 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Deprecated: white is better than black
>Dnia 24.02.2021 o godz. 12:12:12 Wietse Venema pisze:
>> Postfix
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Dnia 24.02.2021 o godz. 12:12:12 Wietse Venema pisze:
Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
better than black.
On 24.02.21 19:29, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
-1
I already wrote when there was a discussion about it
Dnia 24.02.2021 o godz. 12:12:12 Wietse Venema pisze:
Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
better than black.
On 24.02.21 19:29, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
-1
I already wrote when there was a discussion about it that changing this is a
waste of time and effort.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 07:29:18PM +0100, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> > Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
> > better than black.
>
> -1
FWIW, I also would not have made these changes, and personally think
they do more harm than good. That said, the best thing at this
Completely agree with Jaroslaw. This is absolutely ridiculous and a waste
of time.
best regards
Kenneth
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
Dnia 24.02.2021 o godz. 12:12:12 Wietse Venema pisze:
Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
better than black.
-1
Dnia 24.02.2021 o godz. 12:12:12 Wietse Venema pisze:
> Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
> better than black.
-1
I already wrote when there was a discussion about it that changing this is a
waste of time and effort.
"Blacklist" and "whitelist" terms never had
What are we going to do about actual light and actual dark?
On 2/24/21 10:37 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote:
I totally agree with this and I am going to work to scrub the prior terminology
from my system.
Thank you, Wietse
—Curtis
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 24, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Wietse Venema
If it helps with others, the SA project uses WelcomeList and BlockList
so you don't have to change acronyms like RBL. Some slides from a talk
at
I totally agree with this and I am going to work to scrub the prior terminology
from my system.
Thank you, Wietse
—Curtis
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 24, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> The following is from the postfix-3.6-20210221 release notes.
>
>Wietse
>
> Postfix
The following is from the postfix-3.6-20210221 release notes.
Wietse
Postfix version 3.6 deprecates terminology that implies white is
better than black. Instead, Postfix prefers 'allowlist', 'denylist',
and variations on those words.
Noel Jones assisted with the initial transition.
> On 24/02/21 11:47 am, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>> Added Virus scanning to a SOHO stetup. clamav-milter is directing (?)
> "infected" mail to postfix HOLD queue.
>
> Perhaps rather than having clamav-milter put the message on hold, it
> might be possible to have clamav-milter simply flag the
Or set it up to catch-all für a certain domain?
Greets,
Ludi
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org Im
Auftrag von dev...@dvb.homelinux.org
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2021 12:57
An: postfix-users@postfix.org
Betreff: Re: replying with OK
On Wed, Feb 24,
Dnia 24.02.2021 o godz. 12:40:43 Zsombor B pisze:
>
> Reason: thousands of junk emails per day are sent from DEV
> environment to forged recipients but there is only a couple of
> recipient domains are allowed. The others get 'relay access denied'
> but the developers are complaining that their
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:40:43PM +0100, Zsombor B wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Is there a way to reply with 'OK' to the sender instead of 'relay access
> denied'?
>
> Reason: thousands of junk emails per day are sent from DEV environment to
> forged recipients but there is only a couple of recipient
Hi,
Is there a way to reply with 'OK' to the sender instead of 'relay
access denied'?
Reason: thousands of junk emails per day are sent from DEV environment
to forged recipients but there is only a couple of recipient domains
are allowed. The others get 'relay access denied' but the
On 24/02/21 11:47 am, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
Added Virus scanning to a SOHO stetup. clamav-milter is directing (?)
"infected" mail to postfix HOLD queue.
Perhaps rather than having clamav-milter put the message on hold, it
might be possible to have clamav-milter simply flag the message (by
36 matches
Mail list logo
