From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adolf Belka To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma: Update to 0.13 Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 23:54:19 +0100 Message-ID: <1b18ad6c-0d19-0c4c-47a1-9a10728a69a0@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4401919568356850008==" List-Id: --===============4401919568356850008== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Peter & * On 28/01/2021 21:36, Peter M=C3=BCller wrote: > Good evening Adolf, > good evening *, >=20 > while you neither are responsible for nor can change anything to it, I must= say missing changelogs > are not a good sign to me. Referring to https://github.com/corecode/dma/com= mits/master, there were > four commits to the source code since version 0.12: I was also surprised that there was no changelog info. Sometimes the programm= ers seem to make the changelogs well hidden but I had searched and searched a= nd not found anything this time. Your approach of extracting info out of the commits is something I will remem= ber for the future. >=20 > 1. Make MASQUERADE config setting override -f > 2. add support for RFC976 From_ lines > 3. add option to verify server certificate fingerprint > 4. Change RCPT TO to split up multiple addresses >=20 > The latter is especially - um - interesting as the full commit message (ava= ilable online at > https://github.com/corecode/dma/commit/450d4b68d3295d2ef50fa5c9576f5c4e043c= 0c80) states: >=20 >> RFC5321 section 4.1.1.3 states that RCPT TO only takes one address at a ti= me. That does sound a bit fundamental to have been missed previously but then thi= s software is also a long way from version 1.0. It's taken 10 years to get fr= om V0.1 V0.13 >=20 > Seriously?! Not even an MTA programmer is reading most basic mail RFCs anym= ore?!?! >=20 > Yes, DMA might be a lightweight replacement for Postfix on machines just ne= eding a better smarthost. > However, the commit above means DMA behaved RFC-ignorant as soon as a messa= ge had more than one > recipient - which apparently does not seem to happen that often to DMA user= s. >=20 > RFC 5321 is not about rocket science or some exotic corner cases at all, it= is one of the most basic > internet standards regarding e-mail communication. We have lost the complex= ity battle years ago, > apparently, we cannot count on application programmers to have a slightest = clue about what they are > doing as well. >=20 > I am shocked about the quality of that piece of software. >=20 > Embittered, > Peter M=C3=BCller >=20 >> - Update dma from 0.12 to 0.13 >> - No changelog information available >> - No change to the rootfile >> >> Signed-off-by: Adolf Belka >> --- >> lfs/dma | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lfs/dma b/lfs/dma >> index aceb2704e..78bb6465f 100644 >> --- a/lfs/dma >> +++ b/lfs/dma >> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ >> =20 >> include Config >> =20 >> -VER =3D 0.12 >> +VER =3D 0.13 >> =20 >> THISAPP =3D dma-$(VER) >> DL_FILE =3D $(THISAPP).tar.gz >> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ objects =3D $(DL_FILE) >> =20 >> $(DL_FILE) =3D $(DL_FROM)/$(DL_FILE) >> =20 >> -$(DL_FILE)_MD5 =3D 58cb2a286995381c92dc557e639622d6 >> +$(DL_FILE)_MD5 =3D 8bf824b065295a594f399c8b96663673 >> =20 >> install : $(TARGET) >> =20 >> --===============4401919568356850008==--