Mailing List Archive

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #52 from Kevin A. McGrail <kmcgrail@apache.org> ---
Next commit lays more groundwork and changes whitelist_from to
welcomelist_from.

svn commit -m 'changing whitelist_from to welcomelist_from including backward
compatibility stubs and using feature check instead of using a version test for
rules. Also added a new plugin for allowing the RaciallyCharged language and
added it disabled to v400.pre. Logic and scoring added for the new plugin as
well to the rules for welcomelist_from and welcomelist_to.'
Sending MANIFEST
Sending ldap/README
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DKIM.pm
Adding lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/RaciallyCharged.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/SPF.pm
Sending lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/WLBLEval.pm
Sending rules/50_scores.cf
Sending rules/60_whitelist.cf
Sending rules/user_prefs.template
Sending rules/v400.pre
Sending sql/README
Sending t/data/01_test_rules.cf
Sending t/data/01_test_rules.pre
Sending t/debug.t
Adding t/spamd_welcomelist_leak.t
Adding t/welcomelist_from.t
Sending t/welcomelist_to.t
Sending t/whitelist_to.t
Transmitting file data .....................
Committed revision 1880494.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #53 from Loren Wilton <lwilton@earthlink.net> ---
I have to say that I strongly object to naming a standard plugin (or any
standard visible interface) "RaciallyCharged". Clearly that is what the author
perceives a lot of terms to be. But a whole lot of other people in a large part
of the world don't see the terms as having anything to do with race, and will
see this as deliberate political labeling of terms that, while perhaps not
neutral, were not "racially" charged until deemed so by others. Will the next
plugin be "MorallyCharged" when someone goes after some other term?

I'd MUCH prefer a more neutral and, dare I say it, "inclusive" term like
"DepreciatedTerms". This can be used as a waste basket for all terms that
people decide to not like, whether they consider them racial, moral, religious,
traditional, or any other negative connotation.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #54 from Giovanni Bechis <giovanni@paclan.it> ---
I would prefer a Deprecate.pm plugin, it could be useful in the future too if
we would like to deprecate other keywords or plugins.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #55 from Kevin A. McGrail <kmcgrail@apache.org> ---
(In reply to Giovanni Bechis from comment #54)
> I would prefer a Deprecate.pm plugin, it could be useful in the future too
> if we would like to deprecate other keywords or plugins.

Have a look at the 60_whitelist.cf logic and the v400.pre. This isn't a plugin
to disable features (i.e. deprecate), it's to enable them.

By having the plugin, the old options work and this can extend to tests like
spamd_whitelist_leak.t for 4.0 so we can ensure that the backwards
compatibility with racially charged options works.

If you need a deprecate plugin, it would be trivial to add another plugin for
that. The current version on revision 1880494 is very simple.

I might be making it more complex though to put the extra linting concepts we
want to add. No digging has been done into that. So this revision is noted on
purpose because it's a very very simple plugin to add.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #56 from Kevin A. McGrail <kmcgrail@apache.org> ---
(In reply to Loren Wilton from comment #53)
> I have to say ...

This is a bug forum not a discussion forum. Discussions belong on-list.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #57 from John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org> ---
(In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #55)

> This isn't a plugin to disable features (i.e. deprecate), it's to enable them.

So name it "EnableDeprecatedTerminology.pm"

I second the objection to "RaciallyCharged.pm". Doing that is essentially
scolding anyone who enables backwards compatibility features.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826

--- Comment #58 from Kevin A. McGrail <kmcgrail@apache.org> ---
(In reply to John Hardin from comment #57)
> (In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #55)
>
> > This isn't a plugin to disable features (i.e. deprecate), it's to enable them.
>
> So name it "EnableDeprecatedTerminology.pm"
>
> I second the objection to "RaciallyCharged.pm". Doing that is essentially
> scolding anyone who enables backwards compatibility features.

The RaciallyCharged plugin doesn't enabled deprecated terminology, it enables
the racially charged language. It's used in the rules specifically for this
issue and the tests as well for backwards compatible. It won't be suitable as
a generic plugin. The plugin describes exactly what the plugin does and I
stand by the name. People should stop using the language.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.