dkim policy in Fedora

[Paul Howarth]

On 09/13/2011 06:31 AM, Miroslav Grepl wrote:
> On 09/12/2011 04:54 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> On 09/12/2011 02:14 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>>> On 09/09/2011 09:41 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>>>> Currently, the SELinux policy for dkim in Fedora (at least for F-15
>>>> and Rawhide) is in the milter module, whereas upstream has a
>>>> separate dkim module. I'm looking at adding support for opendkim (a
>>>> fork of dkim-milter), which has recently been imported to Fedora,
>>>> and if I send a patch upstream, it's not going to get pulled into
>>>> Fedora because Fedora is using a patched milter module rather than
>>>> upstream's dkim module. Is there any reason for this other than it
>>>> being a historical thing due to it being in Fedora before
>>>> upstream?
>>>>
>>>> Paul. -- selinux mailing list selinux at lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
>>> Lets work to get the Upstream and Fedora code merged. I have a
>>> feeling others have worked on the Fedora policy that are using the
>>> milters all the time, so I think our stuff is good.
>>>
>>> dgrift and mgrepl would no better then I.
>> Shouldn't be a big job anyway.
>>
>> I'd just posted (upstream) a patch adding support for opendkim, which
>> was recently introduced in Fedora, and I'd like to get that merged too.
>>
>> Paul.
>> --
>> selinux mailing list
>> selinux at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
> Could you open a new bug on Fedora too. And we should take care to get
> the Upstream and Fedora code merged as Dan said.

Done:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737992

Cheers, Paul.