bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla
May 15, 2012, 5:51 AM
Post #7 of 8
(246 views)
Permalink
|
|
[Bug 6795] RegistrarBoundaries.pm "Two-Level TLDs" cleanup
[In reply to]
|
|
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6795
--- Comment #7 from AXB <axb.lists [at] gmail> ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > > > Also sounds good to me though having a way to override everything via a cf
> > > > > (which I don't think we currently have) would be ideal. I wonder if ALL of
> > > > > this shouldn't be updateable via sa-update?
> > > >
> > > > override? don't understand what you want to overide.
> > > >
> > > > uridnsbl_skip_domain would pretty much overide these
> > > >
> > > > don't think it's a good idea to update .pm stuff via sa-update. Too many
> > > > variables which can break it.
> > > >
> > > > If required we can quick temp updates via 20_aux_tlds.cf and and use RB only
> > > > in releases
> > >
> > > I don't mean to distribute the .pm file via sa-update. I mean that perhaps
> > > the list of TLDs should be in a cf file and not in a pm file. So if .xyzpdq
> > > tld is released tomorrow, we can just update that cf file via sa-update and
> > > not have to do a new release.
> >
> > gooood morning KAM :)
> >
> > we already have this: 20_aux_tlds.cf
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/trunk/rules/20_aux_tlds.cf
>
> I know but I'm thinking that this option "My intentions is to ONLY include
> official 2ltlds in RegistrarBoundaries and move the rest (vanity) to file
> based (20_aux_tlds.cf) " only allows for new entries and not
> removals/changes.
>
>
> So I'm wondering why it isn't solely in the cf file with nothing in the .pm?
-1 for that.
Plus, do we know how this could affect speed, or if it could break apps using
the API.
the data in the .pm is very static and a default set should be provided.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
|
