Re: @debian.org mail

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Lange <DLange@debian.org> writes:

    Daniel> Hence I'd like us to offer email services to project members. That's
    Daniel> an offer. Not a requirement. If DDs use the Debian infra or continue
    Daniel> using their current setup, all fine for me.

We're agreed so far.

    Daniel> Yes, a proper SPF record may make things more difficult for people
    Daniel> that run their own. But I - for example - run my own and route via
    Daniel> Debian MX (just the Debian mail of course). So it can be
    Daniel> done.

I explained why I find routing the mail problematic.
But more than that, you don't need the SPF record.
Debian could  pay to get on one of the white lists, we could use some services
like Amazon SES, we could possibly get a good enough dkim reputation
that we don't need to do any of the above.

My point is that from experience, the SPF record will totally cripple
people wanting to use their own infrastructure even worse than we see
today.

I absolutely agree with the idea of improving Debian's email reputation.