6 Jul
2016
6 Jul
'16
11:54 a.m.
On mer., juil. 6, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On 06 Jul 2016, at 11:15, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
They don't need XWiki to send mail trough their own SMTP server.
I think they do because the mail sender api requires PR and on a farm you don’t get it.
And if they want to use java mail they need groovy which also requires PR.
Do you see a way for them to send mail without PR?
On 06 Jul 2016, at 10:54, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
So we could easily decide to use the local wiki only for some properties if we want.
> On 06 Jul 2016, at 10:31, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>
> IMO ideally we should have <current wiki> -> <main wiki> for each
> configuration property, not all or nothing. Exactly like standard
> XWikiPreference based configuration properties.
This is what we have, it’s already per-property.
> As for the 1 vs 2 I really see no reason to forbid overwriting part of
> the configuration in his own wiki for use cases like myxwiki.org for
> example.
The question is: Do we really want local admins on myxwiki.org to be able to use their
own SMTP servers? I guess with ours we could configure some anti-spamming techniques to
prevent myxwiki users from spamming people. At least we would have the mail logs in our
SMTP server when some third party decides to blacklist us.
1) The SMTP server is not the only thing you can setup there (for
example it's interesting to change the default from mail address for
you wiki). But you might still want to use your own SMTP server for
you wiki (becauseou have a SMTP server which provide some analysis of
the mails, storage, etc.). 2) I don't see the relationship with spam.
The only thing really
important for spam is who is allowed to send mail, not really who is
allowed to choose the SMTP server. Allowing someone to configure his
own SMTP server actually only decrease the load on the main SMTP
server and the chance of it being used for spam in case it's
overwritten.
I explained the relationship in the previous mail. In short: controlling the SMTP server
allows you take some actions/monitor mails. And
again what would be blacklisted is this other SMTP server so we don't
care.
Indeed, good point. I was thinking about myxwiki.org being blacklisted but you’re right,
there’s no reason for myxwiki.org to be blacklisted; it’s not the one sending the mail.
This is a bit over simplistic, there is not just blacklisting of SMTP servers in the
arsenal of the anti-spamming tools. There is also analysis of mails themselves, and the
originating server is surely a strong evidence for anti-spamming tools.
My feeling is that mail routing is the charge of the SMTP server, and that you can
configure a SMTP server to do what you need if you ever need a custom dispatching
solution. I see no point of an application to have to manage more than one SMTP server
unless you are a mass mailing solution provider. Moreover, the SMTP configuration is more
the responsibility of the sysadmin that has installed the servlet container for the
application than the administrator of that application. So I would see this more in a
config file, than in a wiki configuration page. And I am pretty sure this sysadmin would
be more peaceful thinking he has the mastery of this configuration than to rely on
application administrators to manage it.
Of course you can find a lot of test/development cases that may find useful to have a
custom independent SMTP server per wiki, but for production, I doubt this is common use
case. So, if the effort or resources require to have a perfect fallback solution is much
higher than just dropping subwiki support, my feeling is that we can drop it. The actual
situation is a pain for the sysadmin, and the worst case.
Thanks,
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
So I’m still in favor of option 2. Anyone strongly in favor of option 1? I’d like to start
modifying the code soon so please reply asap.
Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> PS: I’m playing the devil’s advocate (trying to represent Denis ;)) because I’m also
preferring option 2.
>
>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
>>>
>>>> But I don't mind too much getting rid of the two [Backward
compatibility] steps.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
>>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m working on http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13546 ("Error
in the log when sending a mail through the Mail API”). One way to fix it would to always
look for the Mail.Config page in the main wiki instead of in the current wiki.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually the current algorithm is the following when looking up a
mail configuration property:
>>>>>
>>>>> * <ul>
>>>>> * <li>Look in Mail.MailConfig in the current wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>[Backward compatibility] Look in (current
space).XWikiPreferences in the current wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>[Backward compatibility] Look in XWiki.XWikiPreferences
in the current wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>Look in the xwiki properties file</li>
>>>>> * </ul>
>>>>>
>>>>> We also need to implement http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-12435
(“Use the Main Wiki Mail Configuration if not overridden at the subwiki level”):
>>>>> “
>>>>> Right now when sending a mail in a subwiki, the configuration is
taken from that subwiki's Mail.MailConfig document.
>>>>> In a non-farm use case, it's a pain to have to configure SMTP
settings for each subwiki.
>>>>> It would be better to look into the main wiki's mail
configuration when there's no overridden config at the subwiki's level.
>>>>> "
>>>>>
>>>>> So I can see 2 options.
>>>>>
>>>>> Option 1: Drop support for looking for configuration in subwikis
>>>>> ========
>>>>>
>>>>> * Rationale: there are few use cases that require overriding the mail
config in a subwiki
>>>>> * Potential issue: if we stop looking for *.XWikiPreferences or for
<current wiki>:Mail.Config then we won’t migrate configurations but always use the
config from the main wiki. So backward compat is theoretically broken.
>>>>> * But it’s likely that the config in subwikis is the same as the
config from the main wiki anyway. It’s also likely that if a subwikis smtp server is
configured, then the main wiki is also configured. So it could be acceptable with a
message in the Release Notes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Option 2: Continue supporting overriding in subwikis
>>>>> ========
>>>>>
>>>>> * Stop bundling Mail.Config for subwikis and modify the config
algorithm to be:
>>>>>
>>>>> * <ul>
>>>>> * <li>Look in Mail.MailConfig in the current wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>[Backward compatibility] Look in (current
space).XWikiPreferences in the current wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>[Backward compatibility] Look in XWiki.XWikiPreferences
in the current wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>Look in Mail.MailConfig in the main wiki</li>
>>>>> * <li>Look in the xwiki properties file</li>
>>>>> * </ul>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I’ve discussed it quickly with Denis who prefers option 1 since he
even sees the ability to configure the smtp server at the wiki level a potential issue
(bypassing the farm admin).
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I’m hesitating and I’d hate to remove the local override
and then find some use cases where we need it.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs