Mailing List Archive

http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3142





------- Additional Comments From ai@vsu.ru 2004-05-27 06:52 -------
Created an attachment (id=1975)
--> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=1975&action=view)
new version of patch




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

http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3142





------- Additional Comments From ai@vsu.ru 2004-05-27 07:03 -------
Subject: spamc/spamd protocol enhancement

> From a short glance does the patch look not to bad, but what's the purpose?
>
> Can't you just process the mail normally and filter out the headers
> afterwards?

Original support for CommuniGate in SA was badly broken (e.g. it created
problems with
messages to mailing lists). In the framework of CommuniGate, the right (as well
as more efficient)
approach is to insert new headers using a CommuniGate plugin (instead of
re-submitting the whole
message again after checking it in SA).

To accomplish this, I would need to either extend the protocol of SA to allow
receiving
only the SA-generated new headers in order to add them in the proper point of
CommuniGate
message processing via a plugin, OR (using the current protocol) to receive the
whole
message from SA, and to parse and extract the SA-generated headers manually,
which is
inefficient, error prone (e.g. the mesasge could already have contained headers
generated by
SA on some other relay), and also would require tracking of possible changes in
SA-related
header set.

In short, the simple protocol extension would allow to solve this problem much
more efficiently.

The text of the plugin is available at:
ftp://ftp.vsu.ru/pub/apps/CGatePro/sa-cgp.c
(this link was posted to wiki pages of SpamAssassin).

> Or use one of the already existing commands and create them
> yourself?

That would require me to track possible changes in the set of headersa generated
by
(future) versions of SA, and not forget to adapt the plugin if there were any
changes.


> Anyway, if you want to have this patch included, you need to submit a CLA to
> the ASF first. If you do so that doesn't mean that we will actually include
> your patch but it will make it more likely ;~)

sorry, please clarify what is CLA and ASF ;-)






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

http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3142

spamassassin-contrib@msquadrat.de changed:

What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #1823 is|0 |1
obsolete| |





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

http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3142





------- Additional Comments From spamassassin-contrib@msquadrat.de 2004-05-27 10:16 -------
Ok, that makes sense to me. I'm personally not opposed to this enhancement but
I don't like the name of the procol "command" and the switch though:

-> The command: The other alternatives to PROCESS do process the messages,
too, though they aren't called PROCESS_FOO. And _XHDR is a bit confusing to
me :) What about simply HEADERS?

-> The switch: -X looks like an extended version of -x which does something
completely different. Unfortunately is -H already used.

I'd suggest -Y but while I thought about it, I had the idea that it could make
sense to have a command TAGS, too, which just returns the tags you can use in
the headers (ie. YESNO, HITS, PREVIEW etc.) in some way. For that -Y would
make more sense and should be reserved. Maybe -Z or -z (as the successor of
-y) could be used?


Oh, and the ASF is the Apache Software Foundation (of which SpamAssassin is
now part of) and CLA stands for Contributor License Agreement, see
http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas



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

http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3142





------- Additional Comments From ai@vsu.ru 2004-05-28 04:12 -------
Subject: Re: spamc/spamd protocol enhancement

> Ok, that makes sense to me. I'm personally not opposed to this enhancement but
> I don't like the name of the procol "command" and the switch though:
>
> -> The command: The other alternatives to PROCESS do process the messages,
> too, though they aren't called PROCESS_FOO. And _XHDR is a bit confusing to
> me :) What about simply HEADERS?

HEADERS - ok :)


> -> The switch: -X looks like an extended version of -x which does something
> completely different. Unfortunately is -H already used.
>
> I'd suggest -Y but while I thought about it, I had the idea that it could make
> sense to have a command TAGS, too, which just returns the tags you can use in
> the headers (ie. YESNO, HITS, PREVIEW etc.) in some way. For that -Y would
> make more sense and should be reserved. Maybe -Z or -z (as the successor of
> -y) could be used?

Ok, choose -z or -Z according to your preferences :)


> Oh, and the ASF is the Apache Software Foundation (of which SpamAssassin is
> now part of) and CLA stands for Contributor License Agreement, see
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas

Oh..., good trouble. :)))






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