You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by da...@chaosreigns.com on 2011/06/29 22:14:09 UTC
Debian packaging of 3.3.2 Re: SEM rules pushed into production
again
On 06/28, darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> On 06/28, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > my vote on the matter. A brand new morning in my timezone and
> > 1140483 appears to have resolved the issue and been published. All
>
> $ host -ttxt 1.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org.
> 1.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org descriptive text "1140054"
>
> Is that expected DNS propagation delay?
I verified that 3.3.1 is now getting rules without SEM. Is a new tarball
going to be uploaded to http://spamassassin.apache.org/downloads.cgi for
use with 3.3.2?
Should the Debian maintainer use the tarball currently on the downloads
page (Mail-SpamAssassin-rules-3.3.2-r1104058.tar.gz) or the latest tarball
(1140482)?
--
"I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance." - Nietzsche
http://www.ChaosReigns.com
Re: Debian packaging of 3.3.2 Re: SEM rules pushed into production
again
Posted by Quanah Gibson-Mount <qu...@zimbra.com>.
--On Wednesday, June 29, 2011 4:58 PM -0400 darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> Noah, SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 is ready for Debian packaging.
>
> Except that the rules tarball on the downloads page at the moment should
> not be used.
>
> Bad: Mail-SpamAssassin-rules-3.3.2-r1104058.tar.gz
> Good: http://sa-update.pccc.com/1140482.tar.gz
I would note that the bad tarball is *still* the tarball on the main
download page for SA. Shouldn't this be fixed by now?
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: Debian packaging of 3.3.2 Re: SEM rules pushed into production
again
Posted by da...@chaosreigns.com.
Noah, SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 is ready for Debian packaging.
Except that the rules tarball on the downloads page at the moment should
not be used.
Bad: Mail-SpamAssassin-rules-3.3.2-r1104058.tar.gz
Good: http://sa-update.pccc.com/1140482.tar.gz
On 06/29, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
> >I verified that 3.3.1 is now getting rules without SEM.
> WoohoO! I concur with 3.3.2.
> >Is a new tarball
> >going to be uploaded to http://spamassassin.apache.org/downloads.cgi for
> >use with 3.3.2?
> Yes, Michael, can you do this now with sa-update.pccc.com/1140482.tar.gz
>
> host -ttxt 2.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org. confirms it's the correct channel and I've checked the tar manually for SEM. Nothing but T_ reuse flag remnants.
>
>
> >Should the Debian maintainer use the tarball currently on the downloads
> >page (Mail-SpamAssassin-rules-3.3.2-r1104058.tar.gz) or the latest tarball
> >(1140482)?
> If possible, we'd like maintainers to act as if 1104058 never existed.
>
> Regards,
> KAM
>
--
"When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries of life disappear and
life stands explained." - Mark Twain
http://www.ChaosReigns.com
Re: Debian packaging of 3.3.2 Re: SEM rules pushed into production
again
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
> I verified that 3.3.1 is now getting rules without SEM.
WoohoO! I concur with 3.3.2.
> Is a new tarball
> going to be uploaded to http://spamassassin.apache.org/downloads.cgi for
> use with 3.3.2?
Yes, Michael, can you do this now with sa-update.pccc.com/1140482.tar.gz
host -ttxt 2.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org. confirms it's the correct channel and I've checked the tar manually for SEM. Nothing but T_ reuse flag remnants.
> Should the Debian maintainer use the tarball currently on the downloads
> page (Mail-SpamAssassin-rules-3.3.2-r1104058.tar.gz) or the latest tarball
> (1140482)?
If possible, we'd like maintainers to act as if 1104058 never existed.
Regards,
KAM