You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> on 2007/03/21 19:09:13 UTC

ready for 3.2.0rc1?

So, 3.2.0 seems to be going pretty well.  It's been very quiet since pre2
last week -- these are the two notable bugs fixed:

- bug 5365: spamd child falling back to 'nobody' due to unknown username
  passed from spamc, attempts to read previous user's bayes dbs (and
  fails)

- shortcircuiting during compile_now() meant that part of the ruleset went
  uncompiled until the first message was scanned in each spamd child

Both are very minor.

I propose I cut a 3.2.0rc1 release candidate tomorrow, then we give *that*
a week to accumulate bugs, and vote on whether it becomes 3.2.0 GA at that
point.  Shout now if you think this is a bad plan...

--j.

Re: ready for 3.2.0rc1?

Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.

Justin Mason wrote:

> I propose I cut a 3.2.0rc1 release candidate tomorrow, then we give *that*
> a week to accumulate bugs, and vote on whether it becomes 3.2.0 GA at that
> point.  Shout now if you think this is a bad plan...

Provided I don't just take a 48 hour nap this weekend, I intend to 
rewrite the ASN plugin this weekend.  I'm not really happy with how it's 
implemented.  It's pretty simple though, provides nothing critical (it 
only provides tokens for bayes) and probably won't be widely used, so 
I've got no problem with an RC now and sticking in the updated plugin 
afterwards.

Daryl

Re: ready for 3.2.0rc1?

Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.

Justin Mason wrote:
> I propose I cut a 3.2.0rc1 release candidate tomorrow, then we give *that*
> a week to accumulate bugs, and vote on whether it becomes 3.2.0 GA at that
> point.  Shout now if you think this is a bad plan...
> 

I think it is a good plan.

Michael

Re: ready for 3.2.0rc1?

Posted by Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com>.

Justin Mason wrote, On 22/3/07 6:09 AM:
> I propose I cut a 3.2.0rc1 release candidate tomorrow, then we give *that*
> a week to accumulate bugs, and vote on whether it becomes 3.2.0 GA at that
> point.  Shout now if you think this is a bad plan...

Looks good to me. +1 on that plan.

 -- sidney