Hello all!
If I may weigh in on this botnet/dns issue....
1) John I completely respect (indeed advocate) the right of volunteers to
do as they wish with their time. In all that I say that follows, I keep
that first in mind. I speak of principles, but make NO demands on your
time.
2) I disagree that another person could/should 'fork' the botnet plug-in.
This would cause confusion even if care was taken to rename the plug-in
or otherwise distinguish the two versions for the newbie looking to
download a recommended plug-in. For something so specific, there
*should* be an 'official' version - yours. I would only 'fork' the
development for a major design philosophy split. The creation of
third-party patches is the correct solution for situations like these.
3) It is *reasonable* to request that the main distribution of a software
package have included within it any patch that has stood the test of
time in use as a third-pary patch, widely applied, tested and validated
as to function and reliability. With respect, your concerns about
required testing are at the least, exaggerated. The testing has been
done by everyone who uses the patch.
4) Mindful of the reasoning that resists 'forking', your main download
site is where a newbie would go to get the plugin. The site is strictly
a download location. I took a look in the package. clearly this is
meant for admins that 'know what they are doing'. I almost qualify. :)
But I would never guess from the package that a patch was available or
useful.
So if I may recommend: Why not include the patch as a separate file in
your download, and include a note in the 'INSTALL' readme, that tells a
user what the patch is for? It can be their business to individually
install and test the patch. By doing this, you keep new users adequately
informed, and provided what they need, while not changing the official
'direction' of the main package. Or don't include the patch. Just include
notes in the readme. Let the user find and download it. :)
All downloadable software, particularly in spamassassin, is intended to be
tested thoroughly by each end user, for their own specific needs
/environment. The very logic that allows you to say that you are not
obliged to make changes to the package because someone has problems also
allows you to include the patch as an 'option' with the same expectation.
Really, it *is* 5 minutes work. Just add the patch to the tarball and a
couple of lines of description ("use this if your DNS hangs"). Once again,
I do NOT presume upon your time. I just argue that it really isn't very
much that this would take. Your call.
- Charles
