[hashcash] Re: migrating to Hashcash: vs X-Hashcash: ?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Hi Adam --

I've just checked in code to accept "Hashcash" as well, it'll be
in SpamAssassin 3.1.0 -- which should be out in a month or two.

- --j.

Adam Back writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > > Also made "Hashcash:" be accepted as well as "X-Hashcash:" suggestion
> > > by Simon Josefsson <jas@xxxxxxxxxxx>.  This way if/when the X- is
> > > dropped from hashcash headers we will not have a backwards
> > > compatibility problem.  (Well not after version 1.15).
> >
> > Great!
> >
> > I'll probably make Gnus generate Hashcash: in a few months.
> 
> I think we should try to migrate SpamAssassin (the main consumer of
> stamps) to accepting Hashcash also before we change the minting to
> produce Hashcash?  (I've Cc'd Justin the SpamAssassin hashcash module
> author).
> 
> Justin: what is the likely life-time of the current deployed SA 3.0.x?
> How long until you could change to accept Hashcash in addition to
> X-Hashcash, and how long until it would be relatively safe to start
> minting with Hashcash header (without having most of deployed SA
> ignore the header)?
> 
> Adam
> 
> ps. www.hashcash.org is down still :-( I think I screwed up in going
> straight to registrar transfer now it says 10 days!  If I had made it
> an external domain first then requested registrar transfer it would
> have had content up during that time once external domain setup had
> happened which is more like 24-48hrs i think.
> 
> In the mean time look at:
> 
>       http://www.cypherspace.org/hashcash.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFB9xgYMJF5cimLx9ARAiZjAJ46jiagKARdr64SscKPPApmaNMrGACfTfx8
IJBMyDGB0TH/CcHzvZR3LcI=
=y/6K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Other related posts: