You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com> on 2009/12/16 06:18:17 UTC
Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
On 12/09/2009 12:22 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
> I strongly believe in time-based goals as being good to keep the project
> moving forward. I also believe that 3.3.0 that we have now is of very
> high quality, certainly far more than 3.2.5.
>
> For this reason I want to cut a new pre-release of whatever is in trunk
> on December 17th. If all P1 bugs targeting 3.3.0 are closed on that date
> then it will be called 3.3.0-rc1. If there remain P1 bugs then this
> upcoming pre-release will be called beta2 instead.
>
> Please look at all the 3.3.0 targeted bugs and promote any to P1 that
> you believe MUST be fixed before 3.3.0 final.
>
> December 17th might seem too aggressive, but looking at the 3.3.0
> targeted bugs there really doesn't appear to be much important
> remaining. If more time is needed then I'm fine with one additional
> week, cutting around December 23rd instead.
>
> Warren Togami
> wtogami@redhat.com
This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not
a big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of
December 23rd.
http://tinyurl.com/yd8n96m
Here is a list of all current bugs targeted at 3.3.0. P1 status means
they must be fixed for 3.3.0 rc1. Please propose further bugs to P1
status if you feel they are important for 3.3.0 final. Please also
propose here if you feel we should exercise the delay from December 17th.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 13:59, Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> wrote:
> It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a 3.3.0
> P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in normal
> course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these too much.
>
>
> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
>> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not a
>> big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of December
>> 23rd.
>>
>
> I think a beta2 would be more appropriate. I think rc1 would be after we
> have all the known P1 bugs closed off.
>
+1. sa-learn --backup being broken is a big deal.
--
--j.
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 13:59, Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> wrote:
> It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a 3.3.0
> P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in normal
> course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these too much.
>
>
> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
>> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not a
>> big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of December
>> 23rd.
>>
>
> I think a beta2 would be more appropriate. I think rc1 would be after we
> have all the known P1 bugs closed off.
>
+1. sa-learn --backup being broken is a big deal.
--
--j.
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.
> Seconded. I guess I'm spinning the rc1 unless jm wants to do it.
>
> I'm reluctantly going to call the first cut rc1.proposed1 after the
> previous discussion. After the 3 day period has passed with no
> objections then it will be renamed to rc1 and released.
Fine with me.
3.3.0-rc1.txt: mention some of the recent changes
Sending build/announcements/3.3.0-rc1.txt
Committed revision 892319.
Mark
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 12/17/2009 04:24 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Suggesting to postpone the wrapup date till tomorrow (December 18)
> to give us one more day to digest the latest changes and see
> where we stand.
>
> Mark
Seconded. I guess I'm spinning the rc1 unless jm wants to do it.
I'm reluctantly going to call the first cut rc1.proposed1 after the
previous discussion. After the 3 day period has passed with no
objections then it will be renamed to rc1 and released.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 12/17/2009 04:24 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Suggesting to postpone the wrapup date till tomorrow (December 18)
> to give us one more day to digest the latest changes and see
> where we stand.
>
> Mark
Seconded. I guess I'm spinning the rc1 unless jm wants to do it.
I'm reluctantly going to call the first cut rc1.proposed1 after the
previous discussion. After the 3 day period has passed with no
objections then it will be renamed to rc1 and released.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.
Suggesting to postpone the wrapup date till tomorrow (December 18)
to give us one more day to digest the latest changes and see
where we stand.
Mark
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.
On Thursday December 17 2009 12:49:25 Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> When reviewing this list and playing around I found that there are 22 bugs
> for milestone 3.2.6. Shouldn't these get reviewed and promoted to 3.3.0 if
> still valid?
What usually happens is that a bug was fixed in trunk (3.3),
but then (if it seemed important and not too difficult to mend)
targeted for 3.2.6 just in case this release ever happens.
If one can find any bugs targeted for 3.2.6 but not yet fixed in 3.3,
please promote or copy them to a 3.3 target.
Mark
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Thursday, December 17, 2009, Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com> wrote:
> Henrik K wrote, On 17/12/09 7:37 PM:
>
> Justin are you the only one who knows about TextCat? Have you looked at it?
>
>
> I was involved with it when we first ported it to SpamAssassin, but its been years since I looked at it. I think that I may be the person most familiar with it, though. I'm afraid that I didn't notice that bug in the database.
>
> Uppercase characters are a tricky problem that had not occurred to me. If textcat is going to recognize languages in multibyte charsets without trying to do any kind of charset decoding, then it can't lowercase all the characters as if it is assuming that they are Roman ASCII. Unless we train it on all-uppercase English as a separate language, it won't recognize it as the English that it trained on.
>
> I guess any more comments on the bug itself ought to be placed in Bugzilla. This mailing list is a fair place to discuss whether it should be considered a blocker for 3.3.0. Personally, I don't think it is. It may be the case that it is a deficiency in using Texcat in SpamAssassin, but it is one that it has always had, among others. It would be good if someone came up with a way for it to be smarter about charsets, but I don't think that can happen in the 3.3.0 time frame.
+1
>
> -- sidney
>
>
--
--j.
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Sidney Markowitz <si...@sidney.com>.
Henrik K wrote, On 17/12/09 7:37 PM:
> Justin are you the only one who knows about TextCat? Have you looked at it?
I was involved with it when we first ported it to SpamAssassin, but its
been years since I looked at it. I think that I may be the person most
familiar with it, though. I'm afraid that I didn't notice that bug in
the database.
Uppercase characters are a tricky problem that had not occurred to me.
If textcat is going to recognize languages in multibyte charsets without
trying to do any kind of charset decoding, then it can't lowercase all
the characters as if it is assuming that they are Roman ASCII. Unless we
train it on all-uppercase English as a separate language, it won't
recognize it as the English that it trained on.
I guess any more comments on the bug itself ought to be placed in
Bugzilla. This mailing list is a fair place to discuss whether it should
be considered a blocker for 3.3.0. Personally, I don't think it is. It
may be the case that it is a deficiency in using Texcat in SpamAssassin,
but it is one that it has always had, among others. It would be good if
someone came up with a way for it to be smarter about charsets, but I
don't think that can happen in the 3.3.0 time frame.
-- sidney
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Henrik K <he...@hege.li>.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 06:12:05PM -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/yd8n96m
> All bugs targeted for 3.3.0.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6228
> Last bug currently P1 priority and considered a blocker.
I'd like to remind of my TextCat bug..
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6229
I don't know if it's a blocker, but it's a pretty serious source for
misclassifications (someone could even block based on it?).
Justin are you the only one who knows about TextCat? Have you looked at it?
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Kai Schaetzl <ma...@conactive.com>.
Warren Togami wrote on Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:12:05 -0500:
> All bugs targeted for 3.3.0.
When reviewing this list and playing around I found that there are 22 bugs
for milestone 3.2.6. Shouldn't these get reviewed and promoted to 3.3.0 if
still valid?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
http://tinyurl.com/yd8n96m
All bugs targeted for 3.3.0.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6228
Last bug currently P1 priority and considered a blocker.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
http://tinyurl.com/yd8n96m
All bugs targeted for 3.3.0.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6228
Last bug currently P1 priority and considered a blocker.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 12/16/2009 08:59 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a
> 3.3.0 P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in
> normal course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these
> too much.
I rather use this opportunity to make a clean break to get rid of
legacy. The change seems to be clear enough, and I am testing the heck
out of this to be sure.
>
>> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December
>> 17th either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It
>> is not a big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline
>> of December 23rd.
>
> I think a beta2 would be more appropriate. I think rc1 would be after we
> have all the known P1 bugs closed off.
If someone can figure out Bug #6228 then all P1's will be closed by Dec
17th. Even without that bug fixed however, I agree with Mark Marintec
that this next release should be called rc1. This is PRETTY CLOSE to
what people will be using, and some wont try it if it is called beta.
Numbers are cheap. We use this as a 'wake up and test it, this is your
last chance!' get the flurry of bugs and polish it up for January or
February release.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 12/16/2009 08:59 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a
> 3.3.0 P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in
> normal course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these
> too much.
I rather use this opportunity to make a clean break to get rid of
legacy. The change seems to be clear enough, and I am testing the heck
out of this to be sure.
>
>> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December
>> 17th either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It
>> is not a big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline
>> of December 23rd.
>
> I think a beta2 would be more appropriate. I think rc1 would be after we
> have all the known P1 bugs closed off.
If someone can figure out Bug #6228 then all P1's will be closed by Dec
17th. Even without that bug fixed however, I agree with Mark Marintec
that this next release should be called rc1. This is PRETTY CLOSE to
what people will be using, and some wont try it if it is called beta.
Numbers are cheap. We use this as a 'wake up and test it, this is your
last chance!' get the flurry of bugs and polish it up for January or
February release.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@pccc.com>.
It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a 3.3.0
P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in normal
course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these too much.
> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not a
> big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of December
> 23rd.
I think a beta2 would be more appropriate. I think rc1 would be after we
have all the known P1 bugs closed off.
regards,
KAM
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.
> Proposed deadline of December 17th or 23rd to get the next pre-release
> cut and proposed for voting.
I'd prefer the earlier date to avoid the holiday void.
I'd also prefer if this one were called RC1, to give some
incentive to wider testing, giving people more time for testing
until January. Numbers are cheap, there can be another
RC in January.
Will anyone be able to work on:
Bug 6228 sa-learn --backup is broken
? That is not my familiar territory, and the Bug 6253
and Bug 4949 are giving me plenty to work on.
Justin Mason wrote:
> I think we will see a flurry of bug reports over the holidays, and
> this will probably necessitate another beta in Jan. FYI.
Another one most likely yes. Whether it's called beta or rc remains
to be decided.
Daryl wrote:
> Other than a "lets get it out" attitude, which I do encourage, are we
> trying to meet any other (distro?) deadlines?
As far as I can tell, the Ubuntu people are looking forward
to a new SA release and have their schedule. Not too tight, but still:
> Subject: Re: Spamassassin - Ubuntu Server
> Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:47:20 +0000
> From: Dave Walker <Da...@ubuntu.com>
> CC: private@spamassassin.apache.org
>
>> What is your schedule, or rather, when is a deadline for your decision
>> about SpamAssassin?
>>
> We haven't yet had the Development Summit, which is happening next week.
> However, at this stage - there isn't a huge hurry. However, I'm keen
> to try and get something done in reasonably short time, as I would like
> to put out a call for testing, to ensure it's as stable as possible at
> Ubuntu release time (Release early, often etc).
>
> However, realistically - it would be really good to have what we plan to
> ship in by around Feburary next year. Although, I would be happy to get
> an RC uploaded as soon as it's ready, and keep the code synced with your
> snapshots until stable.
>
> For more information on the development cycle:
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidReleaseSchedule
Mark
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
I think we will see a flurry of bug reports over the holidays, and
this will probably necessitate another beta in Jan. FYI.
On Wednesday, December 16, 2009, Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/16/2009 12:39 AM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
>
> On 16/12/2009 12:18 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
>
> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not
> a big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of
> December 23rd.
>
>
> What is the proposed deadline of December 23rd proposing a deadline for?
> Is that when you propose a general availability release? I would, as
> we have in the past, be apprehensive about releasing before a major long
> and drawn-out holiday. If a flaw is discovered in the release and it
> needs to be fixed and a new release cut ASAP (lots of people make a
> stink about having to revert or can't figure out how) I'd rather that
> all happen when a whole bunch of people aren't unreachable due to family
> members thinking that they're more important than spam filtering. I
> would propose that a GA release not happen before January 2nd.
>
>
> Proposed deadline of December 17th or 23rd to get the next pre-release cut and proposed for voting. Reading the guidelines on the Wiki and build/README it seems anybody can cut a pre-release at any time, and release can be rejected by "lazy consensus" meaning no objections.
>
> This is a pre-release, likely the last pre-release before 3.3.0 final. I do believe the proposed GA should happen after January 2nd.
>
>
>
> Other than a "lets get it out" attitude, which I do encourage, are we
> trying to meet any other (distro?) deadlines?
>
>
>
> No distro deadline that I am aware of.
>
> Warren
>
>
--
--j.
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.
On 16/12/2009 1:12 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
> This is a pre-release, likely the last pre-release before 3.3.0 final. I
> do believe the proposed GA should happen after January 2nd.
Cool. :)
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 12/16/2009 12:39 AM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> On 16/12/2009 12:18 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
>> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
>> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not
>> a big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of
>> December 23rd.
>
> What is the proposed deadline of December 23rd proposing a deadline for?
> Is that when you propose a general availability release? I would, as
> we have in the past, be apprehensive about releasing before a major long
> and drawn-out holiday. If a flaw is discovered in the release and it
> needs to be fixed and a new release cut ASAP (lots of people make a
> stink about having to revert or can't figure out how) I'd rather that
> all happen when a whole bunch of people aren't unreachable due to family
> members thinking that they're more important than spam filtering. I
> would propose that a GA release not happen before January 2nd.
Proposed deadline of December 17th or 23rd to get the next pre-release
cut and proposed for voting. Reading the guidelines on the Wiki and
build/README it seems anybody can cut a pre-release at any time, and
release can be rejected by "lazy consensus" meaning no objections.
This is a pre-release, likely the last pre-release before 3.3.0 final.
I do believe the proposed GA should happen after January 2nd.
>
> Other than a "lets get it out" attitude, which I do encourage, are we
> trying to meet any other (distro?) deadlines?
>
No distro deadline that I am aware of.
Warren
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by Yet Another Ninja <sa...@alexb.ch>.
On 12/16/2009 6:39 AM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> I'd rather that all happen when a whole bunch of people aren't unreachable due to family
> members thinking that they're more important than spam filtering. I
> would propose that a GA release not happen before January 2nd.
agreed!
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.
On 16/12/2009 12:18 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not
> a big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of
> December 23rd.
What is the proposed deadline of December 23rd proposing a deadline for?
Is that when you propose a general availability release? I would, as
we have in the past, be apprehensive about releasing before a major long
and drawn-out holiday. If a flaw is discovered in the release and it
needs to be fixed and a new release cut ASAP (lots of people make a
stink about having to revert or can't figure out how) I'd rather that
all happen when a whole bunch of people aren't unreachable due to family
members thinking that they're more important than spam filtering. I
would propose that a GA release not happen before January 2nd.
Other than a "lets get it out" attitude, which I do encourage, are we
trying to meet any other (distro?) deadlines?
Daryl
Re: Reminder:: 3.3.0 pre-release cut: December 17th
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@pccc.com>.
It was a good catch that RNBL replaced SSBL but I don't see this as a 3.3.0
P1 issue. Same thing with HABEAS/BSP. Can't these be handled in normal
course with GA and then sa-update? I worry we are hurrying these too much.
> This is a reminder of the goal to cut another pre-release December 17th
> either named beta2 or rc1 depending on the above conditions. It is not a
> big deal if we need to delay the cut to the proposed deadline of December
> 23rd.
I think a beta2 would be more appropriate. I think rc1 would be after we
have all the known P1 bugs closed off.
regards,
KAM