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

[Ross Boylan]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 01:20:52PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> tags #387078 moreinfo
> user exim4 at packages.debian.org
> usertags #387078 close-20070228
> thanks
> 
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 05:11:16PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Would it be less confusing if that whitelist would be renamed to
> > acl_local_whitelist and used in 30_exim4_config_check_mail and for the
> > SPF checks as well (which seem to be the only deny stanzas left
> > that do not use the whitelist)?
> 
> This question has not yet been answered. Tagging the bug appropriately
> to be closed by the end of February.
> 
> Greetings
> Marc
> 
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."

Sorry for the delay.

Ross