You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net> on 2004/04/26 21:13:02 UTC
saproxy in bugzilla ...
Seeing the wiki updates about saproxy got me thinking ... If they
don't have a free version available, and they don't use our bugzilla
(which it looks like they don't), does anyone have an issue if I blow
away the "saproxy" product entry?
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"So, the long and short of it--if you have one sysadmin, you have a
"system administrator." If you have two sysadmins, you have two "system
administrators." If you have two thousand sysadmins, you're at LISA."
- Trey Harris <Pi...@shells.valinux.com>
Re: saproxy in bugzilla ...
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 03:13:02PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Seeing the wiki updates about saproxy got me thinking ... If they
> don't have a free version available, and they don't use our bugzilla
> (which it looks like they don't), does anyone have an issue if I blow
> away the "saproxy" product entry?
+1 for removing.
Michael
Re: saproxy in bugzilla ...
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 12:37:14PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net> writes:
>
> > Seeing the wiki updates about saproxy got me thinking ... If they
> > don't have a free version available, and they don't use our bugzilla
> > (which it looks like they don't), does anyone have an issue if I blow
> > away the "saproxy" product entry?
>
> If "they" is Stata Labs, there is still an open source version at
> SourceForge to consider. Dan McD has been quiet, but he's not Stata
> Labs.
>
Perhaps a seperate project could be opened at Sourceforge and use the
tracker there for those issues.
Michael
Re: saproxy in bugzilla ...
Posted by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net>.
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 12:37:14PM -0700, Dan Quinlan wrote:
> If "they" is Stata Labs, there is still an open source version at
> SourceForge to consider. Dan McD has been quiet, but he's not Stata
> Labs.
Well, "they" was sort of amorphous. It just looks like the saproxy
bugzilla hasn't been used at all, and if the open source version isn't
under active development, there's no real point in keeping the bugzilla
queue open.
Plus there's the whole "moving BZ to ASF systems" thing we never finished
ironing out, which would leave the saproxy version as well...
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
I know it's weird, but it does make it easier to write poetry in perl. :-)
-- Larry Wall in <78...@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Re: saproxy in bugzilla ...
Posted by Daniel Quinlan <qu...@pathname.com>.
Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net> writes:
> Seeing the wiki updates about saproxy got me thinking ... If they
> don't have a free version available, and they don't use our bugzilla
> (which it looks like they don't), does anyone have an issue if I blow
> away the "saproxy" product entry?
If "they" is Stata Labs, there is still an open source version at
SourceForge to consider. Dan McD has been quiet, but he's not Stata
Labs.
--
Daniel Quinlan anti-spam (SpamAssassin), Linux,
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ and open source consulting