Re: [Sqlgrey-users] Re: Sender whitelisting

[Michel B. <mi...@bo...>]

Le Lundi 07 F=E9vrier 2005 15:20, Lionel Bouton a =E9crit :
> For recipients I'm more than OK with it (this is the opt-in and opt-out
> TODO entry).
> For senders, as I already said, I see it as a big hole in the
> greylisting process.

If the default is to come with an empty sender whitelist, IMHO it doesn't=
=20
"open a hole", but it gives "flexibility to the user" as it lets him mana=
ge=20
the tool he uses according to his own needs and specific server=20
configuration.

The default empty sender whitelist can even come with all the necessary=20
warnings stating that using it is a bad idea ;-))

It's commonplace to say that most of the times developpers of tools don't=
 have=20
exactly the same needs and views about the tools they develop, than some=20
users may have among a broad userbase.

Now the philosophical debate is about whether a developper's goal should =
be to=20
keep the tool fitting exactly to his own personal view (you get qmail and=
=20
most of DJB's production ;-) or if the developper should try to bring=20
features that his users would like to see as long as they are not=20
incompatible with the tool...

But that's not technique anymore, that's philosophy ;-))

--=20
Michel Bouissou <mi...@bo...> OpenPGP ID 0xDDE8AC6E