-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> with 2008.08 jSPF 0.9.6 fails the macromania test because %- and %_ are
> incorrectly expanded to - and _.
> I fixed that as soon as I saw the macromania test in openspf testsuite.
>
> [...]
>
> jSPF 0.9.6 conforms to (and includes) rfc4408-tests-2007.05.yml
> The next release will pass the current specification. The only known
> issue with jSPF 0.9.6 is the macro expansion above.
Got it. I listed jSPF as compliant with 2007.05 since 0.9.6:
http://www.openspf.org/Implementations
In the process, I removed the entire "reference implementations" section.
It was controversial from the beginning, and its entire purpose was to
get the old Mail::SPF::Query deprecated gracefully, which once upon a
time actually _was_ the reference implementation. It would have been
hard to overcome M:S:Q's "reference implementation" character without
serving any replacement, however now that we do have a number of high
quality implementations as well as a solid compliance testing concept
(the test suite with its release scheme), there isn't a need for having
dedicated "reference implementations" anymore.
> [...]
> At ASF (Apache Software Foundation) we have a strict release process
> and we never recommend the use of snapshots and we never point users to
> nightlies or snapshots.
So let's NOT say anything like "2008.08: trunk" in addition to "2007.05:
since 0.9.6".
> If you tell me that it won't take 2 more years to update the page I'll
> ask a new run as soon as we'll release 0.9.7. We'll probably wait a bit
> more because we want to include newer dns libraries so to fix any
> Kaminsky DNS vulnerability and a race issue in the asynchronous version
> of our resolver.
Please do. Now that we've reasonably established that 0.9.6 passes
2007.05, there's little speaking against giving you the benefit of the
doubt and _right_away_ listing 0.9.7 as passing 2008.08, but that might
confuse users who then go looking for 0.9.7 despite it not having been
released yet.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkisah4ACgkQwL7PKlBZWjvT2QCgsqFgM5daXjdBchiLW5p4we2e
7vUAn0qlhJnhRa5j4b94i4hVbIwye6c5
=21mZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Hash: SHA1
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> with 2008.08 jSPF 0.9.6 fails the macromania test because %- and %_ are
> incorrectly expanded to - and _.
> I fixed that as soon as I saw the macromania test in openspf testsuite.
>
> [...]
>
> jSPF 0.9.6 conforms to (and includes) rfc4408-tests-2007.05.yml
> The next release will pass the current specification. The only known
> issue with jSPF 0.9.6 is the macro expansion above.
Got it. I listed jSPF as compliant with 2007.05 since 0.9.6:
http://www.openspf.org/Implementations
In the process, I removed the entire "reference implementations" section.
It was controversial from the beginning, and its entire purpose was to
get the old Mail::SPF::Query deprecated gracefully, which once upon a
time actually _was_ the reference implementation. It would have been
hard to overcome M:S:Q's "reference implementation" character without
serving any replacement, however now that we do have a number of high
quality implementations as well as a solid compliance testing concept
(the test suite with its release scheme), there isn't a need for having
dedicated "reference implementations" anymore.
> [...]
> At ASF (Apache Software Foundation) we have a strict release process
> and we never recommend the use of snapshots and we never point users to
> nightlies or snapshots.
So let's NOT say anything like "2008.08: trunk" in addition to "2007.05:
since 0.9.6".
> If you tell me that it won't take 2 more years to update the page I'll
> ask a new run as soon as we'll release 0.9.7. We'll probably wait a bit
> more because we want to include newer dns libraries so to fix any
> Kaminsky DNS vulnerability and a race issue in the asynchronous version
> of our resolver.
Please do. Now that we've reasonably established that 0.9.6 passes
2007.05, there's little speaking against giving you the benefit of the
doubt and _right_away_ listing 0.9.7 as passing 2008.08, but that might
confuse users who then go looking for 0.9.7 despite it not having been
released yet.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkisah4ACgkQwL7PKlBZWjvT2QCgsqFgM5daXjdBchiLW5p4we2e
7vUAn0qlhJnhRa5j4b94i4hVbIwye6c5
=21mZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com