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 2007/08/02 19:56:11 UTC
[VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Theo Van Dinter writes:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:54:18PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
> > as far as I know, if they're rules in the "rulesrc" tree, it's
> > C-T-R; but rules in the "rules" dir are still R-T-C.
> >
> > I'd be happy to loosen this up, though.
>
> I'm fine with that too. The rules dir (imo) is essentially a snapshot of the
> rules in the update channel at the time, so I don't see much reason to have
> them not both be CTR.
ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
"lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
My vote: +1
--j.
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <ke...@thoughtworthy.com>.
> +1 for this from me as well. "Rules is Rules" (Wonders is someone will
> get my quote?)
+1 for me as well to CTR rules.
Regards,
KAM
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by Doc Schneider <ma...@maddoc.net>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Justin Mason wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:54:18PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>>> as far as I know, if they're rules in the "rulesrc" tree, it's
>>> C-T-R; but rules in the "rules" dir are still R-T-C.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy to loosen this up, though.
>> I'm fine with that too. The rules dir (imo) is essentially a snapshot of the
>> rules in the update channel at the time, so I don't see much reason to have
>> them not both be CTR.
>
> ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
> be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
> "lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
>
> My vote: +1
>
> --j.
+1 for this from me as well. "Rules is Rules" (Wonders is someone will
get my quote?)
- --
-Doc
Penguins: Do it on the ice.
8:44am up 4 days, 16:55, 17 users, load average: 0.18, 0.30, 0.37
SARE HQ http://www.rulesemporium.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with CentOS - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGshu8qOEeBwEpgcsRAvfCAKCGQ4vmVVrC23Qs1Yf7yjbiyY6ylQCdE2i/
do00I4Jh05ANz+QkEijjuog=
=hKsx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>.
Justin Mason wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter writes:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:54:18PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>>> as far as I know, if they're rules in the "rulesrc" tree, it's
>>> C-T-R; but rules in the "rules" dir are still R-T-C.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy to loosen this up, though.
>>>
>> I'm fine with that too. The rules dir (imo) is essentially a snapshot of the
>> rules in the update channel at the time, so I don't see much reason to have
>> them not both be CTR.
>>
>
> ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
> be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
> "lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
>
> My vote: +1
>
> --j.
>
My vote is +1. If any committer isn't confident in a rule they can
always hold off committing and ask others to test it..
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.
On Thursday August 2 2007 19:56:11 Justin Mason wrote:
> ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
> be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
> "lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
+1
Mark
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.
Justin Mason wrote:
> ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
> be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
> "lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
>
> My vote: +1
+1
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@apache.org>.
Justin Mason wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:54:18PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>>> as far as I know, if they're rules in the "rulesrc" tree, it's
>>> C-T-R; but rules in the "rules" dir are still R-T-C.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy to loosen this up, though.
>> I'm fine with that too. The rules dir (imo) is essentially a snapshot of the
>> rules in the update channel at the time, so I don't see much reason to have
>> them not both be CTR.
>
> ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
> be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
> "lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
>
> My vote: +1
>
+1 from me.
Michael
Re: [VOTE] Re: Votes for Rules Updates?
Posted by Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com>.
Justin Mason wrote, On 3/8/07 5:56 AM:
ok, let's vote to change the procedure: that changes in the "rules" tree
> be considered Commit-Then-Review, even when changes in the code (such as
> "lib") are considered Review-Then-Commit.
+1