On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 05:27:42PM +0100, Justin B Rye wrote: > Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 12:11:20PM +0100, Justin B Rye wrote: > >> Justin B Rye wrote: > >>> Christian PERRIER wrote: > >>>> Default: http://yourserver/tt-rss/ > >>> > >>> It seems to me we should have some explicit policy rule against > >>> defaults like this: http://[CENSORED].com really exists. If you need > >>> a dummy hostname that's guaranteed not to have a webserver, what's > >>> wrong with example.org? Or we could even make the default localhost, > >>> so that it'll work for testing before you set it live. But none of > >>> this is in my patch. > >> > >> Indeed, while it reached d-l-e as > >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2013/05/msg00040.html > >> just mentioning yourserver dot com seems to have got my mail > >> rejected by the BTS spam-filters, so probably we ought to fix it. > > > > I used "http://yourserver/tt-rss/"; as default, since it is the > > default from upstream's example config. This default value gets > > special handling in upstream's sourcecode (it will show a page, > > that the config value must be changed). > > Upstream bugs are still bugs! Let them know that if they want a safe > example domain they should be following RFC2606. But until then it's > up to you whether you want to stick to their default. Right. It's now reported upstream under [0]. [0] http://tt-rss.org/redmine/issues/683 -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature