Open source (WAS: Spam rule for HTTP/HTTPS request to sender's root domain)

[Tom Hendrikx <to...@whyscream.net>]

On 20-03-19 19:56, Mike Marynowski wrote:
> 
> A couple people asked about me posting the code/service so they could
> run it on their own systems but I'm currently leaning away from that. I
> don't think there is any benefit to doing that instead of just utilizing
> the centralized service. The whole thing works better if everyone using
> it queries a central service and helps avoid people easily making bad
> mistakes like the one above and then spending hours scrambling to try to
> find non-existent botnet infections on their network while mail bounces
> because they are on a blocklisted :( If someone has a good reason for
> making the service locally installable let me know though, haha.

When people are interested in seeing the code, their main incentive for
such a request is probably not that they want to run it themselves. They
might, in no particular order:

- would like to learn from what you're doing
- would like to see how you're treating their contributed data
- would like to verify the listing policy that you're proposing
- would like to study if there could be better criteria for
listing/unlisting than the ones currently available
- change things to the software and contribute that back for the
benefit of everyone
- squash bugs that you're currently might be missing
- help out on further development of the service if or when your time is
limited
- don't be depending on a single person to maintain a service they like

This is called open source, and it's a good thing. For details on the
philosophy behind it,
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ is
a good read.

In short: if you like your project to prosper, put it on github for
everyone to see.

Kind regards,

	Tom

Re: Open source

[Ralph Seichter <ab...@monksofcool.net>]

* RW:

> You're missing the point.

It may surprise you, but there is more than one "point" to having
packages, and I can choose to make whatever point I damn well
please. :-)

-Ralph

Re: Open source (WAS: Spam rule for HTTP/HTTPS request to sender's root domain)

[RW <rw...@googlemail.com>]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 18:26:15 +0100
Ralph Seichter wrote:

> * Mike Marynowski:
> 
> > I was more asking if there is a good reason to build packages
> > intended for local installation by email server operators and I
> > don't think there really is.  
> 
> As a maintainer of several Gentoo Linux ebuilds, I agree you should
> leave packaging to the various Linux distributions. Building, testing,
> dependency management etc. vary significantly. Best leave that to the
> folks who do it on a regular basis.

You're missing the point. The reason for not having packages, is that
it's more accurate if everyone shares the same database.

Re: Open source (WAS: Spam rule for HTTP/HTTPS request to sender's root domain)

[Ralph Seichter <ab...@monksofcool.net>]

* Mike Marynowski:

> I was more asking if there is a good reason to build packages intended
> for local installation by email server operators and I don't think
> there really is.

As a maintainer of several Gentoo Linux ebuilds, I agree you should
leave packaging to the various Linux distributions. Building, testing,
dependency management etc. vary significantly. Best leave that to the
folks who do it on a regular basis.

-Ralph

Re: Open source (WAS: Spam rule for HTTP/HTTPS request to sender's root domain)

[Mike Marynowski <mi...@singulink.com>]

Perhaps I should have been clearer - I'm not against posting the code 
for any reason and I am planning to do that anyway in case anyone wants 
to look at it or chip in improvements and whatnot.

I'm an active contributor on many open source projects and I have fully 
embraces OSS :) I was more asking if there is a good reason to build 
packages intended for local installation by email server operators and I 
don't think there really is. There's a fundamental difference in how the 
project would be setup if it was intended to be installed by all email 
server operators, i.e. writing a config file loader instead of 
hardcoding values, allowing more flexibility, building packages for 
different operating systems, etc. What I'm saying is I don't think I 
will be officially supporting that route as it seems more beneficial to 
collaborate on a central database, though people are obviously free to 
do with the code as they wish.

Cheers!

Mike

On 3/21/2019 5:42 AM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> On 20-03-19 19:56, Mike Marynowski wrote:
>> A couple people asked about me posting the code/service so they could
>> run it on their own systems but I'm currently leaning away from that. I
>> don't think there is any benefit to doing that instead of just utilizing
>> the centralized service. The whole thing works better if everyone using
>> it queries a central service and helps avoid people easily making bad
>> mistakes like the one above and then spending hours scrambling to try to
>> find non-existent botnet infections on their network while mail bounces
>> because they are on a blocklisted :( If someone has a good reason for
>> making the service locally installable let me know though, haha.
> When people are interested in seeing the code, their main incentive for
> such a request is probably not that they want to run it themselves. They
> might, in no particular order:
>
> - would like to learn from what you're doing
> - would like to see how you're treating their contributed data
> - would like to verify the listing policy that you're proposing
> - would like to study if there could be better criteria for
> listing/unlisting than the ones currently available
> - change things to the software and contribute that back for the
> benefit of everyone
> - squash bugs that you're currently might be missing
> - help out on further development of the service if or when your time is
> limited
> - don't be depending on a single person to maintain a service they like
>
> This is called open source, and it's a good thing. For details on the
> philosophy behind it,
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ is
> a good read.
>
> In short: if you like your project to prosper, put it on github for
> everyone to see.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> 	Tom
>

Re: Open source (WAS: Spam rule for HTTP/HTTPS request to sender's root domain)

[Mike Marynowski <mi...@singulink.com>]

Here ya go ;)

https://github.com/mikernet/HttpCheckDnsServer

On 3/21/2019 5:42 AM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> On 20-03-19 19:56, Mike Marynowski wrote:
>> A couple people asked about me posting the code/service so they could
>> run it on their own systems but I'm currently leaning away from that. I
>> don't think there is any benefit to doing that instead of just utilizing
>> the centralized service. The whole thing works better if everyone using
>> it queries a central service and helps avoid people easily making bad
>> mistakes like the one above and then spending hours scrambling to try to
>> find non-existent botnet infections on their network while mail bounces
>> because they are on a blocklisted :( If someone has a good reason for
>> making the service locally installable let me know though, haha.
> When people are interested in seeing the code, their main incentive for
> such a request is probably not that they want to run it themselves. They
> might, in no particular order:
>
> - would like to learn from what you're doing
> - would like to see how you're treating their contributed data
> - would like to verify the listing policy that you're proposing
> - would like to study if there could be better criteria for
> listing/unlisting than the ones currently available
> - change things to the software and contribute that back for the
> benefit of everyone
> - squash bugs that you're currently might be missing
> - help out on further development of the service if or when your time is
> limited
> - don't be depending on a single person to maintain a service they like
>
> This is called open source, and it's a good thing. For details on the
> philosophy behind it,
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ is
> a good read.
>
> In short: if you like your project to prosper, put it on github for
> everyone to see.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> 	Tom
>