Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 14:02:29 -0500 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> To: "Ion-Mihai \"IOnut\" Tetcu" <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> Cc: vd@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, nivo+sender+0820bd@is-root.com Subject: Re: How to construct this port? Message-ID: <20061228140229.47a7a8ff.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: <20061228203313.0752d58e@it.buh.tecnik93.com> References: <4593AB3D.5090107@is-root.com> <20061228122828.GA8473@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <20061228123616.GA8652@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <20061228145728.4f13fa4a@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <4594049E.2040404@mac.com> <20061228203313.0752d58e@it.buh.tecnik93.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In response to "Ion-Mihai \"IOnut\" Tetcu" <itetcu@FreeBSD.org>: > On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 12:53:34 -0500 > Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> wrote: > > [ ... ] > > > However, sometimes mail systems go down or block traffic for whatever > > reason: postmaster's job is a thankless task, and this was true even > > before spam and viral email appeared. Nowadays, it's harder to get > > things mostly right (nevermind "perfect"), so postmasters make > > imperfect decisions because they are faced with undesirable tradeoffs. > > Indeed :-( > > However banning a hole country isn't a tradeoff in my book, it's just > plain [inset_the_word_here]. And sine it's giving a 5XX code there's > really no way to reach the person in question. I disagree. There are certain countries where the people in charge simply don't seem to care whether or not they're spamming or not. It takes a while for me to get ticked off enough to block an entire country, but there are three or four on my list right now. Besides, it's _his_ mailserver. He has the right to accept to deny mail as he sees fit. Trying to tell him otherwise is like trying to tell me that I have to eat a certain type of food. On the flip side, if you're unable to get in contact with him, why not just file a PR? At that rate, the standard timeouts go into effect. > > It has not been my observation that insisting people not make any > > mistakes commonly results in fewer mistakes being made, or much less, > > in zero mistakes being made. :-) Rather than try to insist they > > "are not allowed" to do something, I'd prefer to let people make > > their own decisions and learn which ones are mistakes. YMMV.... > > The problem is that, IMHO, this kind of rejecting affects us all as I > think that being a port maintainer implies receiving and replying to > users' email. No, it doesn't. "Port maintainer" is a volunteer position. If you start dictating too many things about what they must and must not do, you're going to run short of willing volunteers. I only maintain a few ports, but I'd quit maintaining those if someone were to tell I had to reconfigure my mailserver. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061228140229.47a7a8ff.wmoran>