Bug#387078: exim4-config: local_host_whitelist man page entries a bit confusing

[Ross Boylan]

On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 14:50 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> tags #387078 - moreinfo
> user exim4 at packages.debian.org
> usertags #387078 - close-20070228
> thanks
> 
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 10:22:24PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > Yes, I think acl_local_whitelist would be clearer, if I understand
> > what's going on!  Then the man page could note that presence on the
> > whitelist does not exempt a host from all checks or policy controls.
> > 
> > To me, whitelist indicates accept unconditionally.  Since that is not
> > the intent (unless your proposal to add in use of the whitelist on
> > some of the acl's makes it that way), perhaps another name would work
> > better.  Maybe acl_local_blacklist_exempt would be good to indicate
> > the intent.  If the scope is broader than blacklists, maybe
> > acl_local_exempt, although that name doesn't mean much by itself,
> > since it raises the question "exempt from what?"
> > 
> > Another word that might be useful is "skip."
> 
> How about acl_local_exceptions? or acl_local_deny_exceptions?
Both are improvements, since they aren't actively misleading.  They
remain a bit cryptic, though acl_local_deny_exceptions does convey the
semantics as I understand it.  Is acl_local_blacklist_exceptions  too
narrow a name, i.e., does this setting affect more than the local
blacklist?

Ross