You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> on 2004/02/13 14:29:56 UTC
Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Hiho,
seems like some people didn't notice that we moved to the ASF SVN and still
report bugs against the latest SF.net CVS.
To make clear that that code is obsolete, I suggest that we remove all code
within the "spamassassin" and "pop3" module to the Attic and just leave a
README which tells the user what has happened. That file would also contain
a description on how to get the latest version of the SF.net CVS code if
somebody still needs it for some reason (a simple 'cvs up -D 2004-01-01'
should do the trick).
What do you think?
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 "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net>.
On Saturday 14 February 2004 17:13 CET Jon wrote:
> Agreed. Those where along my thoughts. Completely remove the source
> from the zip/tar and just have it contain the text file. This would
> satisfy one's download script and more or less, force them to read the
> file.
It's not about the generated tar balls (which are generated from SVN in
future), but about the CVS repository itself.
> Daniel Quinlan said:
> > "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
> >> To make clear that that code is obsolete, I suggest that we remove all
> >> code
> >
> > Total overkill.
> >
> > Just add a file "THIS-TREE-IS-OBSOLETE" or something like that.
Not everybody reads the documents shipped with the code; if they would they
would have noticed that we moved (I think). So if you up you cvs repository
and suddenly everything but a single file is gone, you'd *have* to notice
that something's goind on :)
But I think yours and Matt's suggestions combined points to the best
direction with less work: I'll just add such a README file and make
Makefile.PL cat it and bail out afterwards.
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 Jon <gr...@ez15loan.com>.
Agreed. Those where along my thoughts. Completely remove the source from
the zip/tar and just have it contain the text file. This would satisfy
one's download script and more or less, force them to read the file.
--
Jon
Daniel Quinlan said:
> "Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
>
>> To make clear that that code is obsolete, I suggest that we remove all
>> code
>
> Total overkill.
>
> Just add a file "THIS-TREE-IS-OBSOLETE" or something like that.
>
> Daniel
>
> --
> Daniel Quinlan anti-spam (SpamAssassin), Linux,
> http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ and open source consulting
>
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by Daniel Quinlan <qu...@pathname.com>.
"Malte S. Stretz" <ms...@gmx.net> writes:
> To make clear that that code is obsolete, I suggest that we remove all
> code
Total overkill.
Just add a file "THIS-TREE-IS-OBSOLETE" or something like that.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan anti-spam (SpamAssassin), Linux,
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ and open source consulting
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by Matthew Cline <ma...@nightrealms.com>.
On Saturday 14 February 2004 05:11 am, Jon wrote:
> 2. Those who use some sort of automated download via crontab or what not
> to grab latest code (those that don't actually view the website), this
> would inform them of where to get the latest code and allow them to adjust
> their scripts accordingly.
This would probably be taking things too far, but if people really are doing
an automated download/install, we might want to also include a Makefile.PL
that would mail of a copy of the README to root@localhost
--
Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on
fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Advanced SPAM filtering software: http://spamassassin.org
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by Jon <gr...@ez15loan.com>.
Perhaps leaving the cvs zip/tar with a simple text file enclosed
explaining that the cvs is obsolete and where the new svn code resides, as
well as a link to the svn program might be better?
This would solve 2 problems:
1. Those who don't read the FAQ or readme first (shame on you!), this
would solve all the unessary questions, like where do I get svn, where is
the trunk located, etc.
2. Those who use some sort of automated download via crontab or what not
to grab latest code (those that don't actually view the website), this
would inform them of where to get the latest code and allow them to adjust
their scripts accordingly.
--
Regards,
Jon
Malte S. Stretz said:
> Hiho,
>
> seems like some people didn't notice that we moved to the ASF SVN and
> still
> report bugs against the latest SF.net CVS.
>
> To make clear that that code is obsolete, I suggest that we remove all
> code
> within the "spamassassin" and "pop3" module to the Attic and just leave a
> README which tells the user what has happened. That file would also
> contain
> a description on how to get the latest version of the SF.net CVS code if
> somebody still needs it for some reason (a simple 'cvs up -D 2004-01-01'
> should do the trick).
>
> What do you think?
>
> 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 "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
Re: Should we "remove" the code from SF.net CVS?
Posted by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net>.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 02:29:56PM +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 ...
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"And the No. 1 response that you'll need to memorize if you plan to bet
your business on Windows 2000: 'You want fries with that?'"
- Nicholas Petreley