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 2004/02/13 23:18:55 UTC
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Theo Van Dinter writes:
>On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 02:29:56PM +0100, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
>> What do you think?
>
>At this point, I'm +1. We were keeping it around as a safety check in
>case we needed to go back or left code there or something, but 2.6x and
>2.7x are fine, so ...
+1.
Note: just for the spamassassin module, not for saproxy or asfpurgatory.
I'd also leave spamassassin3 around for historical purposes.
- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQFALU1PQTcbUG5Y7woRAtFqAKCWG6Pr+t4MZ+ukiFt40mQChe9GUwCgsdKz
0GfrYUAK5J9aMI+44kl9grM=
=pX7J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by "Robert J. Accettura" <ro...@accettura.com>.
I've been keeping tabs on SAproxy. AFAIK the only reason there are no
commits, is because nobody with commit permissions has done it.
There are bugs, and users. I've almost figured out how to put a nice
binary package together for Mac OS X users.
Malte S. Stretz wrote:
>On Friday 13 February 2004 23:44 CET Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 02:18:55PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Note: just for the spamassassin module, not for saproxy or
>>>asfpurgatory. I'd also leave spamassassin3 around for historical
>>>purposes.
>>>
>>>
>>speaking of which... since saproxy is not coming with us, we should (imo)
>>kick them off our bugzilla. is it even being used for their bug
>>tracking?
>>
>>
>
>I thought saproxy is dead -- there hasn't been a commit for ages. At least
>that was what I more or less told the person who filed bug 3034.
>
>Cheers,
>Malte
>
>
>
--
Robert J. Accettura
robert@accettura.com
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net>.
On Friday 13 February 2004 23:44 CET Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 02:18:55PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
> > Note: just for the spamassassin module, not for saproxy or
> > asfpurgatory. I'd also leave spamassassin3 around for historical
> > purposes.
>
> speaking of which... since saproxy is not coming with us, we should (imo)
> kick them off our bugzilla. is it even being used for their bug
> tracking?
I thought saproxy is dead -- there hasn't been a commit for ages. At least
that was what I more or less told the person who filed bug 3034.
Cheers,
Malte
--
[SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
<http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
[ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net>.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 02:18:55PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
> Note: just for the spamassassin module, not for saproxy or asfpurgatory.
> I'd also leave spamassassin3 around for historical purposes.
speaking of which... since saproxy is not coming with us, we should (imo)
kick them off our bugzilla. is it even being used for their bug tracking?
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"A good rice cooker will have a hinged top and pink floral patterns on
it, btw." - Eric Lakin