[Gross] project status?

[Rolf E. Sonneveld]

Jesse Thompson wrote:
> Nice work, as always.
>
> Do you think that the memory leak is severe enough that I won't be 
> able to upgrade to this version in production?  Otherwise, I'd like to 
> try out the RHSBL and the DNSWL enhancements.
>
> I can't remember if it was ever suggested to add simple DNS checks, 
> like imposing restrictions on the reverse DNS record of the IP.  That 
> feature could be pushed out post 1.0 though.
>
> I think that your plan on ironing out the last of the stability bugs 
> and finishing the documentation is best.  Would you like me to work on 
> some of the documentation?
>
> Jesse
>
> Eino Tuominen wrote:
>> Jesse Thompson wrote:
>>> I haven't been paying much attention to gross lately.  I was out for a
>>> while, then I focussed on migrating gross from our linux servers to
>>> solaris zones on our MTAs, after that I was focussed on other things.
>>>
>>> So, what's the status of this project?  Version 0.8.2 has been 
>>> extremely
>>> stable and effective.  Is it ready for a 1.0 release?  Or is 
>>> svn-r207 in
>>> need of testing first?
>>
>> I have not had any time to work on gross lately. svn-r207 must be tested
>> but it has a bug that causes a memoryleak. I suspect the bug is in the
>> blocker check, but have not had the time to make sure of it.
>>
>> I have to rewrite the blocker check once again to use asynchronous IO
>> because synchronous IO seems to block some times due to glitches in PMX
>> blocker service.
>>
>> The main modifications since 0.8.2 are (from NEWS file):
>>
>> * preliminary support for MILTER protocol, check config file
>> * support for definitive checks: it's now possible to write
>>   checks that cause grossd to block or pass (whitelisting)
>> * dnsbl check is now run time configurable
>> * two new check types: RHSBL and DNSWL - check config file
>>   for documentation and examples. DNSWL is first definitive
>>   check.
>>
>> - improved thread counting in thread_pool.c
>> - code cleaning
>>
>> Issues fixed:
>> #40: new type of check - RHSBL (RFE)
>> #41: new type of check - DNSWL (RFE)
>> #46: Make dnsbl checking run time configurable (RFE)
>> #47: Grossd will not run any checks if configured with --disable-dnsbl
>>
>>> What enhancements should we prioritize next?
>>
>> 1. modify blocker check to use asynchronous I/O,
>> 2. make sure the code is stable.
>> 3. finish the documentation.
>>
>> Then I'll release gross 1.0. After that we'll be able to make more
>> radical changes. Are there any "must have"-features that need to be
>> implemented before 1.0?

what does the name 'gross' stand for? I believe the 'gr' in gross is for 
'greylisting', isn't it? Looking at the developments up till now you may 
want to reconsider the name of gross, as it's no longer only doing 
greylisting. It's becoming more and more of a 'Generic Rock-solid Open 
Source Spamfilter' ;-)

And may I suggest for version 1.1 support for DKIM?

Regards,
/rolf