On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Magnus Hagander<magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>
> On 23 jun 2009, at 12.14, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Dave Page wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Ultimately it seems the failure to fix this problem is just because
>>>>>> Marc is the only one able to do it, and he's not around enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, the real problem is having our mail infrastructure tied into
>>>>> hub.org as a number of us have said before.
>>>>
>>>> Now that I have those two new servers in place, if someone wants to
>>>> setup spamassassin on that VPS itself to run instead of going through
>>>> the global spamassassin daemon, I'm cool with that ... I haven't moved
>>>> mail over to the new servers yet, but that just takes 15-20 minutes of
>>>> downtime to make happen ... could do that tomorrow evening ...
>>>
>>> Just to be absolutely clear on what you're saying here.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that you are now OK with de-coupling the postgresql.org
>>> mail from hub.org making it a community managed service?
>>>
>>> Or are you saying that you're ok with running a *second* instance of
>>> spamassassin, and still keep mail going through hub.org relays?
>>
>> I'm okay with a dedicated instance of spamassassin running in
>> mail.postgresql.org so that it can be more tailored / configured to mark
>> spam going through to the moderators ...
>
> So you're still not accepting that the mail services are a community service
> and resource. Ok, sorry to hear that, but good to know.
>
> In that case, the the statement by Dave still stands - this does not fix the
> actual issue. It does paint over one crack a bit, but it does nothing to fix
> the structural problem.
Since I'm new here, what is the structural problem?
...Robert