{"payload":{"feedbackUrl":"https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/53140","repo":{"id":820898241,"defaultBranch":"main","name":"postal","ownerLogin":"schueffi","currentUserCanPush":false,"isFork":true,"isEmpty":false,"createdAt":"2024-06-27T11:56:31.000Z","ownerAvatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?v=4","public":true,"private":false,"isOrgOwned":false},"refInfo":{"name":"","listCacheKey":"v0:1720215448.0","currentOid":""},"activityList":{"items":[{"before":"2aa8ff9b708fa24d26165f8ce5fe18425afa7577","after":null,"ref":"refs/heads/add_token_for_bounces","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:37:28.000Z","pushType":"branch_deletion","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"}},{"before":null,"after":"57af325af9b30429d221fdaa0909d6377d61f78e","ref":"refs/heads/add_message_token_for_bounces","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:37:17.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional\n\n    Beside the search based on X-Postal-MsgID header, we also can assign incoming\n    bounces by their individually generated mail address (with the same tag as\n    in the X-Postal-MsgID). This is configurable, with the default disabled to\n    have it backwards compatible.\n    From a performance perspective, searching by this address based approach\n    always is faster than scanning the full mail for the presence of the header,\n    so we could also consider to make this feature enabled by default.","shortMessageHtmlLink":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional"}},{"before":"abe91fb9f5f473b167dc335b346798360ee45298","after":null,"ref":"refs/heads/add_message_token_to_return_path","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:34:04.000Z","pushType":"branch_deletion","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"}},{"before":"c510d1ed78a088d3b705e2d0f17662ae31615b1b","after":null,"ref":"refs/heads/add_and_use_token_for_bounces","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:34:00.000Z","pushType":"branch_deletion","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"}},{"before":null,"after":"2aa8ff9b708fa24d26165f8ce5fe18425afa7577","ref":"refs/heads/add_token_for_bounces","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:33:42.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional\n\n    Beside the search based on X-Postal-MsgID header, we also can assign incoming\n    bounces by their individually generated mail address (with the same tag as\n    in the X-Postal-MsgID). This is configurable, with the default disabled to\n    have it backwards compatible.\n    From a performance perspective, searching by this address based approach\n    always is faster than scanning the full mail for the presence of the header,\n    so we could also consider to make this feature enabled by default.","shortMessageHtmlLink":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional"}},{"before":null,"after":"c510d1ed78a088d3b705e2d0f17662ae31615b1b","ref":"refs/heads/add_and_use_token_for_bounces","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:26:34.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional\n\n    Beside the search based on X-Postal-MsgID header, we also can assign incoming\n    bounces by their individually generated mail address (with the same tag as\n    in the X-Postal-MsgID). This is configurable, with the default disabled to\n    have it backwards compatible.\n    From a performance perspective, searching by this address based approach\n    always is faster than scanning the full mail for the presence of the header,\n    so we could also consider to make this feature enabled by default.","shortMessageHtmlLink":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional"}},{"before":null,"after":"abe91fb9f5f473b167dc335b346798360ee45298","ref":"refs/heads/add_message_token_to_return_path","pushedAt":"2024-07-05T21:06:01.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional\n\nBeside the search based on X-Postal-MsgID header, we also can assign incoming\nbounces by their individually generated mail address (with the same tag as\nin the X-Postal-MsgID). This is configurable, with the default disabled to\nhave it backwards compatible.\nFrom a performance perspective, searching by this address based approach\nalways is faster than scanning the full mail for the presence of the header,\nso we could also consider to make this feature enabled by default.","shortMessageHtmlLink":"assign bounces by their address tag, optional"}},{"before":null,"after":"0235752a14732a36a023df4d3022aea388eb7968","ref":"refs/heads/add_configurable_batch_size","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:46:28.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"Add support for configurable dequeue size\n\nWhen sending messages to remote MTAs, the messages get dequeued in batches\nfrom the local queue. As the batch-key is the given remote MX server, those\nmessages will be delivered to this remote MTA in one SMTP session.\nAlthough this is good for performance (to reuse the same SMTP session for\nmany mails), many of the real-world MTAs do not like sending too much mails\nat once in one single session.\n\nExample error messages are similar to \"421 too many messages in this connection\"\n\nTherefore, we make the limit adjustable (with the default value of 100 to be\nbackwards compatible). From our experiences with the last 5 million emails\nsent, having a batch size of 10 works almost ever, and 50 seems to be the upper\n\"real world\" limit before hitting those rate limits by the remote MTAs.","shortMessageHtmlLink":"Add support for configurable dequeue size"}},{"before":"95fa57fc1ddd0994906ecdca4d0fcd2f1764a238","after":null,"ref":"refs/heads/dkim_keysize","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:21:18.000Z","pushType":"branch_deletion","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"}},{"before":null,"after":"7626b0e0e7821b7e88db887de69733e75ff24319","ref":"refs/heads/add_configurable_dkim_keysize","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:20:55.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"Add support for configurable DKIM key sizes\n\nIn order to support DKIM RSA key sizes other than 1024, a new config\nvariable default_dkim_key_size has been introduced. The default value\nstill is 1024 to make it backwards compatible, but it now supports\ne.g. 2048 or 4096 bit keys as well.\n\nAt the time of this commit (mid-2024), having 2048 bit keys is\nrecommended by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)","shortMessageHtmlLink":"Add support for configurable DKIM key sizes"}},{"before":"2895391d63d8791d1c79383f09f65184b37e7603","after":null,"ref":"refs/heads/main_old","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:19:20.000Z","pushType":"branch_deletion","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"}},{"before":null,"after":"da90e75036c27482699921613d838f4058a100e7","ref":"refs/heads/main","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:16:40.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"chore(main): release 3.3.4 (#3014)\n\nCo-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>","shortMessageHtmlLink":"chore(main): release 3.3.4 (<a class=\"issue-link js-issue-link\" data-error-text=\"Failed to load title\" data-id=\"2364456166\" data-permission-text=\"Title is private\" data-url=\"https://github.com/postalserver/postal/issues/3014\" data-hovercard-type=\"pull_request\" data-hovercard-url=\"/postalserver/postal/pull/3014/hovercard\" href=\"https://github.com/postalserver/postal/pull/3014\">postalserver#3014</a>)"}},{"before":"2895391d63d8791d1c79383f09f65184b37e7603","after":null,"ref":"refs/heads/main","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:15:16.000Z","pushType":"branch_deletion","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"}},{"before":null,"after":"2895391d63d8791d1c79383f09f65184b37e7603","ref":"refs/heads/main_old","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:15:15.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"Add support for CNAME delegated DKIM keys\n\nIn order to use a DKIM public key, it has to be published in the DNS system.\nThe most easy setup simply puts it directly into the appropriate TXT record.\nA more advanced setup also allows them to be delegated to some other record\npointed to by a CNAME record.\n\nAs an example, both variants are equivalent in terms of DKIM key validation:\n\nselector1._domainkey.example.org IN TXT \"v=DKIM1; p=...\"\n\nand\n\nselector1._domainkey.example.org IN CNAME \"somekey.mailprovider.org.\"\nsomekey.mailprovider.org IN TXT \"v=DKIM1; p=...\"\n\nSo, the actual key management can be delegated to some other party by means of\nusing a CNAME.\n\nThis is of special importance for infrastructure automation and DKIM key rotation\n(we just ask the customer / domain dns owner once to add the appropriate CNAME\npointing to the corresponding record on our own domain, and then we're able to\nmodify the DKIM keys on our own without requiring the customers to update their\nDNS records all the time).\nAs key rotation is a current best practice, the added CNAME support will ease\nthe respective implementation.\n\nThis commit changes the code to first check a TXT record (as before), and in\naddition checks a CNAME record (and if found, check the record it is referring\nto - up to a limit of 10 recursion steps to avoid endless recursions).","shortMessageHtmlLink":"Add support for CNAME delegated DKIM keys"}},{"before":null,"after":"2895391d63d8791d1c79383f09f65184b37e7603","ref":"refs/heads/add_dkim_cname_support","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:09:40.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"Add support for CNAME delegated DKIM keys\n\nIn order to use a DKIM public key, it has to be published in the DNS system.\nThe most easy setup simply puts it directly into the appropriate TXT record.\nA more advanced setup also allows them to be delegated to some other record\npointed to by a CNAME record.\n\nAs an example, both variants are equivalent in terms of DKIM key validation:\n\nselector1._domainkey.example.org IN TXT \"v=DKIM1; p=...\"\n\nand\n\nselector1._domainkey.example.org IN CNAME \"somekey.mailprovider.org.\"\nsomekey.mailprovider.org IN TXT \"v=DKIM1; p=...\"\n\nSo, the actual key management can be delegated to some other party by means of\nusing a CNAME.\n\nThis is of special importance for infrastructure automation and DKIM key rotation\n(we just ask the customer / domain dns owner once to add the appropriate CNAME\npointing to the corresponding record on our own domain, and then we're able to\nmodify the DKIM keys on our own without requiring the customers to update their\nDNS records all the time).\nAs key rotation is a current best practice, the added CNAME support will ease\nthe respective implementation.\n\nThis commit changes the code to first check a TXT record (as before), and in\naddition checks a CNAME record (and if found, check the record it is referring\nto - up to a limit of 10 recursion steps to avoid endless recursions).","shortMessageHtmlLink":"Add support for CNAME delegated DKIM keys"}},{"before":null,"after":"95fa57fc1ddd0994906ecdca4d0fcd2f1764a238","ref":"refs/heads/dkim_keysize","pushedAt":"2024-07-02T17:00:22.000Z","pushType":"branch_creation","commitsCount":0,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"Add support for configurable DKIM key sizes\n\nIn order to support DKIM RSA key sizes other than 1024, a new config\nvariable default_dkim_key_size has been introduced. The default value\nstill is 1024 to make it backwards compatible, but it now supports\ne.g. 2048 or 4096 bit keys as well.\n\nAt the time of this commit (mid-2024), having 2048 bit keys is\nrecommended by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)","shortMessageHtmlLink":"Add support for configurable DKIM key sizes"}},{"before":"da90e75036c27482699921613d838f4058a100e7","after":"2895391d63d8791d1c79383f09f65184b37e7603","ref":"refs/heads/main","pushedAt":"2024-06-27T13:54:05.000Z","pushType":"push","commitsCount":1,"pusher":{"login":"schueffi","name":"Stefan Schüffler","path":"/schueffi","primaryAvatarUrl":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2255174?s=80&v=4"},"commit":{"message":"Add support for CNAME delegated DKIM keys\n\nIn order to use a DKIM public key, it has to be published in the DNS system.\nThe most easy setup simply puts it directly into the appropriate TXT record.\nA more advanced setup also allows them to be delegated to some other record\npointed to by a CNAME record.\n\nAs an example, both variants are equivalent in terms of DKIM key validation:\n\nselector1._domainkey.example.org IN TXT \"v=DKIM1; p=...\"\n\nand\n\nselector1._domainkey.example.org IN CNAME \"somekey.mailprovider.org.\"\nsomekey.mailprovider.org IN TXT \"v=DKIM1; p=...\"\n\nSo, the actual key management can be delegated to some other party by means of\nusing a CNAME.\n\nThis is of special importance for infrastructure automation and DKIM key rotation\n(we just ask the customer / domain dns owner once to add the appropriate CNAME\npointing to the corresponding record on our own domain, and then we're able to\nmodify the DKIM keys on our own without requiring the customers to update their\nDNS records all the time).\nAs key rotation is a current best practice, the added CNAME support will ease\nthe respective implementation.\n\nThis commit changes the code to first check a TXT record (as before), and in\naddition checks a CNAME record (and if found, check the record it is referring\nto - up to a limit of 10 recursion steps to avoid endless recursions).","shortMessageHtmlLink":"Add support for CNAME delegated DKIM keys"}}],"hasNextPage":false,"hasPreviousPage":false,"activityType":"all","actor":null,"timePeriod":"all","sort":"DESC","perPage":30,"startCursor":"Y3Vyc29yOnYyOpK7MjAyNC0wNy0wNVQyMTozNzoyOC4wMDAwMDBazwAAAAR4IJor","endCursor":"Y3Vyc29yOnYyOpK7MjAyNC0wNi0yN1QxMzo1NDowNS4wMDAwMDBazwAAAARw5U0X"}},"title":"Activity · schueffi/postal"}