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 2011/05/10 18:30:44 UTC

Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Both of these need 1 vote from somebody other than Mark Martinec and Kevin
A. McGrail, for 3.3.2:

[review] Cannot Log to stderr without timestamps
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6418

[review] wrong status test on $sth->rows in BayesStore::PgSQL
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6454


I think these two should probably be retargeted for 3.3.3:

[review] cross-sign GPG keys, have an official SA keyring
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5924
Although it looks like it just needs 1 vote and a commit of
KEYS/GPG.KEY/pubkey.txt.  

[review] Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF - Two enhancement issues
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6490
Has no votes for 3.3.



I am pleasantly surprised that three got closed yesterday.  I was wrong.
That day, at least, was worth waiting.  But I still think it's worth
releasing 3.3.2 as soon as Warren can get his password reset.

-- 
"theres a lot more to life than chicks
none of it matters but theres a lot of it"
- LeRoy, #motorcycles, #EFNet, 7/18/06
http://www.ChaosReigns.com

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by da...@chaosreigns.com.

On 05/13, darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> # Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
> # process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to your .cf
> # files; this variable should not be modified.
> # Unless you're actually making an official pre-release or release
> # candidate, in which case put something like pre1 or rc1 in here).
> @EXTRA_VERSION = qw();

Without the extraneous close parentheses:

# Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
# process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to your .cf
# files; this variable should not be modified.
# Unless you're actually making an official pre-release or release
# candidate, in which case put something like pre1 or rc1 in here.
@EXTRA_VERSION = qw();

-- 
"it's not how good you are, it's how bad you want it" - no fear
http://www.ChaosReigns.com

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by da...@chaosreigns.com.

On 05/13, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> Although I'm not sure what it should say.  What was the intent of
> what is currently written there?

I'd change it to:

# Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
# process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to your .cf
# files; this variable should not be modified.
# Unless you're actually making an official pre-release or release
# candidate, in which case put something like pre1 or rc1 in here).
@EXTRA_VERSION = qw();

How is it going?

-- 
"Force, my friends, is violence; the supreme authority
from which all other authority is derived."
- Michael Ironside, Starship Troopers
http://www.ChaosReigns.com

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.

On Saturday May 14 2011 01:50:47 Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> t/make_install.t .................. 1/25 # Failed test 2 in
> t/make_install.t at line 52
> t/make_install.t .................. 22/25 # Failed test 24 in
> t/make_install.t at line 99
> t/make_install.t .................. Failed 2/25 subtests
> Test Summary Report
> -------------------
> t/make_install.t                (Wstat: 0 Tests: 25 Failed: 2)
>    Failed tests:  2, 24
> Files=168, Tests=2077, 441 wallclock secs ( 1.35 usr  0.42 sys + 230.64
> cusr 23.53 csys = 255.94 CPU)
> Result: FAIL
> Failed 1/168 test programs. 2/2077 subtests failed.
> make: *** [test_dynamic] Error 255
> 
> [warren@CHLOE spamassassin-3.3]$ rpm -q perl
> perl-5.10.1-115.el6.x86_64
> 
> Is this test failure serious?  Do other people see it?

I'm not seing it here locally, but trouble
with a directory $instdir/foo sounds familiar.
Can't find a ref to that, but must have been around
a previous release.

  Mark

Re: More Problems in 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 05/13/2011 01:56 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
>> - Temporary kludge check until bug 6297 is fixed properly:
>>
>> grep nopublish rules/72_active.cf
>>
>> This should return nothing. If not, edit the rulesrc files and
>> add "tflags nopublish" lines as necessary.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> [warren@CHLOE spamassassin-3.3]$ grep nopublish rules/72_active.cf
> tflags T_DATE_IN_DISTANT_FUTURE nopublish
<SNIP>

Before doing the 3_3_2_rc_1 tag I would prefer opinions on this and the 
"make test" failures.

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

t/make_install.t .................. 1/25 # Failed test 2 in 
t/make_install.t at line 52
t/make_install.t .................. 22/25 # Failed test 24 in 
t/make_install.t at line 99
t/make_install.t .................. Failed 2/25 subtests
Test Summary Report
-------------------
t/make_install.t                (Wstat: 0 Tests: 25 Failed: 2)
   Failed tests:  2, 24
Files=168, Tests=2077, 441 wallclock secs ( 1.35 usr  0.42 sys + 230.64 
cusr 23.53 csys = 255.94 CPU)
Result: FAIL
Failed 1/168 test programs. 2/2077 subtests failed.
make: *** [test_dynamic] Error 255

[warren@CHLOE spamassassin-3.3]$ rpm -q perl
perl-5.10.1-115.el6.x86_64

Is this test failure serious?  Do other people see it?

I'm still testing things in the release proces...

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.

On 5/13/2011 6:18 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> On 5/12/2011 4:25 PM, darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>> On 05/12, Michael Parker wrote:
>>>> # Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official 
>>>> release
>>>> # process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag 
>>>> to your .cf
>>>> # files; this variable should not be modified.
>>>> @EXTRA_VERSION = qw();
>>>>
>>>> I'm supposed to put version_tag into a .cf file for the 3.3.2-rc1 
>>>> cut, or modify this variable here that should not be modified?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, put rc1 in there.  Double check with a ./spamassassin.raw 
>>> --version call to make sure it's picking it up correctly.
>>
>> And fix the comment in trunk.
>>
>
> Although I'm not sure what it should say.  What was the intent of what 
> is currently written there?

I read this as end-users shouldn't fiddle with it moreso than 
administrators and that it's the proper place for us to add the rc1, etc.

Regards,
KAM

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 5/12/2011 4:25 PM, darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> On 05/12, Michael Parker wrote:
>>> # Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
>>> # process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to your .cf
>>> # files; this variable should not be modified.
>>> @EXTRA_VERSION = qw();
>>>
>>> I'm supposed to put version_tag into a .cf file for the 3.3.2-rc1 cut, or modify this variable here that should not be modified?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, put rc1 in there.  Double check with a ./spamassassin.raw --version call to make sure it's picking it up correctly.
>
> And fix the comment in trunk.
>

Although I'm not sure what it should say.  What was the intent of what 
is currently written there?

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by da...@chaosreigns.com.

On 05/12, Michael Parker wrote:
> > # Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
> > # process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to your .cf
> > # files; this variable should not be modified.
> > @EXTRA_VERSION = qw();
> > 
> > I'm supposed to put version_tag into a .cf file for the 3.3.2-rc1 cut, or modify this variable here that should not be modified?
> > 
> 
> Yes, put rc1 in there.  Double check with a ./spamassassin.raw --version call to make sure it's picking it up correctly.

And fix the comment in trunk.

-- 
"If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies,
there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed." - Exodus 22:2
http://www.ChaosReigns.com

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

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

On May 12, 2011, at 8:42 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:

> On 05/12/2011 12:24 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>> Warren wrote:
>>>> 6526 is not critical, it could be fixed after rc1 or anytime later in
>>>> sa-update without risk.
>>> Oops, I was thinking about the URI skip list bug, not rfc-ignorant.
>> 
>> I think the state of affairs is good enough for a rc1 cut now,
>> the rest can be settled later.
>> 
>>   Make
> 
> I'm confused about this in lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm:
> # Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
> # process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to your .cf
> # files; this variable should not be modified.
> @EXTRA_VERSION = qw();
> 
> I'm supposed to put version_tag into a .cf file for the 3.3.2-rc1 cut, or modify this variable here that should not be modified?
> 

Yes, put rc1 in there.  Double check with a ./spamassassin.raw --version call to make sure it's picking it up correctly.

Michael


> Warren Togami
> warren@togami.com

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 05/12/2011 12:24 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Warren wrote:
>>> 6526 is not critical, it could be fixed after rc1 or anytime later in
>>> sa-update without risk.
>> Oops, I was thinking about the URI skip list bug, not rfc-ignorant.
>
> I think the state of affairs is good enough for a rc1 cut now,
> the rest can be settled later.
>
>    Make

I'm confused about this in lib/Mail/SpamAssassin.pm:
# Used during the prerelease/release-candidate part of the official release
# process. If you hacked up your SA, you should add a version_tag to 
your .cf
# files; this variable should not be modified.
@EXTRA_VERSION = qw();

I'm supposed to put version_tag into a .cf file for the 3.3.2-rc1 cut, 
or modify this variable here that should not be modified?

Warren Togami
warren@togami.com

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.

Warren wrote:
> > 6526 is not critical, it could be fixed after rc1 or anytime later in
> > sa-update without risk.
> Oops, I was thinking about the URI skip list bug, not rfc-ignorant.

I think the state of affairs is good enough for a rc1 cut now,
the rest can be settled later.

  Make

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 5/12/2011 11:49 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> On 5/12/2011 3:37 AM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>> > Everyone ready for a 3.3.2-rc1 cut late Thursday?
>>
>> Working on a Bug 6515, will have it ready soon.
>> Other than that, it's fine with me.
>>
>> If we strike some solution for Bug 6526 (Disable rfc-ignorant.org) by
>> then,
>> even better.
>>
>> Mark
>
> 6526 is not critical, it could be fixed after rc1 or anytime later in
> sa-update without risk.
>
> Warren

Oops, I was thinking about the URI skip list bug, not rfc-ignorant.

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 5/12/2011 3:37 AM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>   >  Everyone ready for a 3.3.2-rc1 cut late Thursday?
>
> Working on a Bug 6515, will have it ready soon.
> Other than that, it's fine with me.
>
> If we strike some solution for Bug 6526 (Disable rfc-ignorant.org) by then,
> even better.
>
>    Mark

6526 is not critical, it could be fixed after rc1 or anytime later in 
sa-update without risk.

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.

On 5/12/2011 9:48 AM, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
> On 2011-05-12 15:37, Mark Martinec wrote:
>> >  Everyone ready for a 3.3.2-rc1 cut late Thursday?
I've reviewed everything on my list and fine here.  Will be nice to get 
back on track and get the 5.12 perl warnings resolved.

>> If we strike some solution for Bug 6526 (Disable rfc-ignorant.org) by 
>> then,
>> even better.
>>
>>    Mark
>
> iirc, some time ago, there used to be an 80_additional.cf file.
> Wouldn't that work?
Wouldn't any of these files except local.cf be in danger of updates from 
sa-update at any time?

re: 6526/6490, I've removed the pre files because that's for plugins not 
rules so it's an error.  Removing that file has clear consensus and 
removes that issue as a blocker for 3.3.2.

I've also changed 6526 to a target of 3.4.0 so we can figure out where, 
if any place, those commented out rules belong.  Currently, they are in 
local.cf as a placeholder in trunk and do not exist anywhere in 3.3.2.

Regards,
KAM

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by Yet Another Ninja <ax...@gmail.com>.

On 2011-05-12 15:37, Mark Martinec wrote:
>   >  Everyone ready for a 3.3.2-rc1 cut late Thursday?
>
> Working on a Bug 6515, will have it ready soon.
> Other than that, it's fine with me.
>
> If we strike some solution for Bug 6526 (Disable rfc-ignorant.org) by then,
> even better.
>
>    Mark

iirc, some time ago, there used to be an 80_additional.cf file.
Wouldn't that work?

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.

 > Everyone ready for a 3.3.2-rc1 cut late Thursday?

Working on a Bug 6515, will have it ready soon.
Other than that, it's fine with me.

If we strike some solution for Bug 6526 (Disable rfc-ignorant.org) by then, 
even better.

  Mark

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 5/11/2011 3:49 AM, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
> On 2011-05-11 15:48, Mark Martinec wrote:
>> Warren writes:
>>> Password is reset. How about we cut whatever is in svn on Thursday? I
>>> have an important thing happening Wednesday, currently busy prepping
>>> for.
>>
>> Fine with me.
>>
>> The Bug 6236 is bugging me, but it seems it has no easy solution.
>>
>> Will the uridnsbl_skip_domain list get updated by then? (Bug 6537)
>
> who has the data?

It was sent to PMC a while ago.  I don't have access to it from here. 
I'll try to take a look in the morning.

Everyone ready for a 3.3.2-rc1 cut late Thursday?

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by Yet Another Ninja <ax...@gmail.com>.

On 2011-05-11 15:48, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Warren writes:
>> Password is reset.  How about we cut whatever is in svn on Thursday?  I
>> have an important thing happening Wednesday, currently busy prepping for.
>
> Fine with me.
>
> The Bug 6236 is bugging me, but it seems it has no easy solution.
>
> Will the uridnsbl_skip_domain list get updated by then? (Bug 6537)

who has the data?

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.

Warren writes:
> Password is reset.  How about we cut whatever is in svn on Thursday?  I
> have an important thing happening Wednesday, currently busy prepping for.

Fine with me.

The Bug 6236 is bugging me, but it seems it has no easy solution.

Will the uridnsbl_skip_domain list get updated by then? (Bug 6537)

  Mark

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.

On 5/10/2011 6:30 AM, darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>
> I am pleasantly surprised that three got closed yesterday.  I was wrong.
> That day, at least, was worth waiting.  But I still think it's worth
> releasing 3.3.2 as soon as Warren can get his password reset.
>

Password is reset.  How about we cut whatever is in svn on Thursday?  I 
have an important thing happening Wednesday, currently busy prepping for.

Warren

Re: Two bugs left just needing 1 vote for 3.3.2 Re: Proposal: 3.3.2-rc1

Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.

> I think these two should probably be retargeted for 3.3.3:
Barring bugs, I think we are planning for a 3.4 next.
> [review] cross-sign GPG keys, have an official SA keyring
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5924
> Although it looks like it just needs 1 vote and a commit of
> KEYS/GPG.KEY/pubkey.txt.
Sadly, I do not know the pros and cons of this ticket to vote.

> [review] Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF - Two enhancement issues
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6490
> Has no votes for 3.3.
>
Needs one more other than me or Mark.
> I am pleasantly surprised that three got closed yesterday.  I was wrong.
> That day, at least, was worth waiting.  But I still think it's worth
> releasing 3.3.2 as soon as Warren can get his password reset.
Warren, call me if you need your password reset still.

Regards,
KAM