Re: ECDH support for sendmail, again

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Dec 6,  2:21am, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
} John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost> wrote:
} 
} > } Sendmail CVS is not public, unfortunately. 
} >      That begs the question of how you got access?
} 
} Nothing extraoridinary: I submitted the patch, the committed version was
} given back to me. 

     Ah, okay.

} > As the pkgsrc maintainer, it is quite likely to be something that I should
} > be looking at.  Certainly having a proper reference would be nice.
} 
} I suggest "Patch from sendmail CVS", but if you want anything more
} precise, you will have to talk with sendmail people. I must confess I
} assumed you were OWNER because you had some insider access.

     I'm OWNER, because the previous OWNER/MAINTAINER didn't have
time to maintain it, noticed that I had significant interest in it
(I use it pretty much everywhere, I use complex configs, and I use
milters {including custom written ones}), and asked me if I would
like to take it over.  I use OWNER instead of MAINTAINER because
it is an important package and a somewhat complex package, so I
don't want to see random changes.  Although I'm not perfect, I do
try to stay on top of requests for changes.

} >      As for the patch itself, I will have to look at it closer and
} > consider the implications of it.  I really don't like the proliferation
} > of options that you have been bringing.  If this is something that
} > doesn't cause harm (or have any downside), then I'm more inclined
} > to just simply enable it all the time.
} 
} No problem for me. I just added a pkgsrc option for each sendmail
} option, but we could have a jumbo ffr, or just always enable them. All
} the FFR TLS features have to be enabled in the config file anyway.

     In other words, they should be harmless, if enabled all the
time, as people must take explicit action for the changes to have
any effect?

} >      BTW, as mentioned before, mail about sendmail should be sent
} > to the address specified in the OWNER= variable and nowhere else!
} > This mail came in on an address that I use primarily for mailing
} > list mail and/or random junk mail, and thus has a low priority.
} 
} pkgsrc-users@ is spam? :-)
} I changed your address in the recipient list to match what is in OWNER.

     Not necessarily spam, although there is a significant amount
of it that I ignore, just not something that I consider to be a
high priority.  Another way to get my attention would be to send
a PR, since they will be assigned to me, and they will stay in my
queue until I handle them.

}-- End of excerpt from Emmanuel Dreyfus