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 2011/05/24 22:31:45 UTC
No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2]
RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Area we really not even going to do another rule release to provide an
already created fix?
On 05/24, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6552
>
> Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Status|NEW |RESOLVED
> Resolution| |FIXED
>
> --- Comment #20 from Kevin A. McGrail <km...@pccc.com> 2011-05-24 16:00:34 UTC ---
> Closing as irrelevant. We will not be making a 3.2.X release.
>
> However, I just checked out 3.2 branch and this appears to be committed.
>
> KAM
>
> --
> Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are on the CC list for the bug.
>
--
"Some people will tell you that slow is good - and it may be, on some
days - but I am here to tell you that fast is better....
That is why God made fast motorcycles...." - Hunter S. Thompson
http://www.ChaosReigns.com
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
>> I consider 3.2 unmaintained and people should be running 3.3.X. I
>> consider a valid cross-over period to maintain both releases but 3.2.x
>> has long since dropped off my radar.
>
> We as a project are being irresponsible by not outright declaring
> 3.2.x to be unmaintained.
I think that's a bit harsh as we don't claim to maintain ANY version and
haven't had a release in very nearly 3 years in the 3.2 branch.
Regards,
KAM
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.
On 5/24/2011 11:23 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> 3.2.x never had auto-rule updates. The 3.3.x updates from trunk was
>> very recent with the release of 3.3.x.
> Good point. I'd forgotten we added that for 3.3. It'
>
> I consider 3.2 unmaintained and people should be running 3.3.X. I
> consider a valid cross-over period to maintain both releases but 3.2.x
> has long since dropped off my radar.
We as a project are being irresponsible by not outright declaring 3.2.x
to be unmaintained.
Warren
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
> I'm not sure what you mean?
The status you are asking for of PENDING_RELEASE is technically correct
for every single bug that is fixed and committed to trunk and/or a branch.
Users have the option to run from SVN so for me, I agree with the bug is
closed with code is resolved. When the code is formally packaged into a
release (or rules update) is a completely separate matter.
> 3.2.x never had auto-rule updates. The 3.3.x updates from trunk was
> very recent with the release of 3.3.x.
Good point. I'd forgotten we added that for 3.3. It'
I consider 3.2 unmaintained and people should be running 3.3.X. I
consider a valid cross-over period to maintain both releases but 3.2.x
has long since dropped off my radar.
Regards,
KAM
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.
On 5/24/2011 11:15 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
>> I continue to be against considering it fixed in Bugzilla because it
>> is upsetting to users if it isn't pushed live.
>>
>> How about a compromise? Add a new semi-closed state to Bugzilla like
>> PENDING_RELEASE to denote that it is 'fixed' but it isn't pushed to
>> users yet.
> Isn't every bug that is fixed but in svn pending a release in this state?
>
I'm not sure what you mean?
>> But then again, if we really have no intention of pushing a new 3.2
>> rule update, then this should be closed as WONTFIX to denote reality.
> Actually, I just don't know if 3.2 rules are automatically released as
> part of our auto update that's turned off at the moment. I've been
> running 3.3.X for so long that I haven't cared that much about 3.2
3.2.x never had auto-rule updates. The 3.3.x updates from trunk was
very recent with the release of 3.3.x.
Warren
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
> I continue to be against considering it fixed in Bugzilla because it
> is upsetting to users if it isn't pushed live.
>
> How about a compromise? Add a new semi-closed state to Bugzilla like
> PENDING_RELEASE to denote that it is 'fixed' but it isn't pushed to
> users yet.
Isn't every bug that is fixed but in svn pending a release in this state?
> But then again, if we really have no intention of pushing a new 3.2
> rule update, then this should be closed as WONTFIX to denote reality.
Actually, I just don't know if 3.2 rules are automatically released as
part of our auto update that's turned off at the moment. I've been
running 3.3.X for so long that I haven't cared that much about 3.2
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Warren Togami Jr." <wt...@gmail.com>.
On 5/24/2011 10:41 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> I don't know if 3.2 releases will be done but the code is committed in
> the 3.2 branch for this bug. So from a code standpoint, it's resolved.
I continue to be against considering it fixed in Bugzilla because it is
upsetting to users if it isn't pushed live.
How about a compromise? Add a new semi-closed state to Bugzilla like
PENDING_RELEASE to denote that it is 'fixed' but it isn't pushed to
users yet.
But then again, if we really have no intention of pushing a new 3.2 rule
update, then this should be closed as WONTFIX to denote reality.
Warren Togami
warren@togami.com
Re: No more 3.2 rule releases? Re: [Bug 6552] [review for 3.2] RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP
ruleset incorrectly black flagging IP range!!!
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
I don't know if 3.2 releases will be done but the code is committed in
the 3.2 branch for this bug. So from a code standpoint, it's resolved.
On 5/24/2011 4:31 PM, darxus@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> Area we really not even going to do another rule release to provide an
> already created fix?
>
> On 05/24, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
>> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6552
>>
>> Kevin A. McGrail<km...@pccc.com> changed:
>>
>> What |Removed |Added
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Status|NEW |RESOLVED
>> Resolution| |FIXED
>>
>> --- Comment #20 from Kevin A. McGrail<km...@pccc.com> 2011-05-24 16:00:34 UTC ---
>> Closing as irrelevant. We will not be making a 3.2.X release.
>>
>> However, I just checked out 3.2 branch and this appears to be committed.
>>
>> KAM
>>
>> --
>> Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
>> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
>> You are on the CC list for the bug.
>>