[SA-exim] The greylisting plugin

[Magnus Holmgren]

As you may or may not know, I'm the new maintainer of the sa-exim Debian
package. As you also may or may not know, sa-exim (the package) is designed
such that SpamAssassin doesn't have to be installed on the same machine as
SA-Exim and of course Exim. Except if you want to use the greylisting module
for SpamAssassin, that is, unless you manually copy Greylisting.pm to the
right place, which isn't too hard to do but it's not pretty and it's not
Right.

The greylisting code exists as a SA plugin (and a patch for ancient SA
versions) for two reasons, AFAIU: It's easier to code in Perl and it also
makes the module usable with other software. But it also has drawbacks; in
particular the X-SA-Exim-* headers that have to be added by the local_scan
code before sending the mail to SA, and that can't be removed if report_safe
is used.

To fix the packaging I'll have to split the package into two, plus a
transitional metapackage by the original name. I would rather write the
greylisting code in C and drop the SA plugin.

So what I want to ask now is whether anyone is using the greylisting plugin
without the main SA-Exim local_scan() plugin. Hm, well, I guess you can
continue doing so in that case. Any other comments?

[Marc MERLIN]

Post by Magnus Holmgren
As you may or may not know, I'm the new maintainer of the sa-exim Debian
So what I want to ask now is whether anyone is using the greylisting plugin
without the main SA-Exim local_scan() plugin. Hm, well, I guess you can

You probably wouldn't find any such folks here, but that said, I've never
heard of any, so it wouldn't be the end of the world if greylisting ended up
directly in sa-exim. It'll just make the code longer and somewhat harder to
maintain than the existing perl version.
That said, writing it is the biggest portion of the job, so once that's
done, the rest won't be as bad in comparison.

Marc