-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
scottn writes: > > ... few rule writers. > > This is explicitly what you (we) are trying to change. > > Is there a HOWTO for prospective rules writers? > Examples maybe? > > If so, it should be more obvious from the spamassassin main web page. > If not, then IMO documentation about the current process would > be more helpful than changing for some other process, no matter > how much "better" the new process is. the current process is like this -- - - contributor develops rules - - opens a bugzilla bug about it - - attaches the ruleset, as a file - - signs a CLA, if it's a big ruleset - - SpamAssassin committers come along, extract the rules, and copy them into "rules/70_testing.cf"; possibly renaming them along the way! - - later -- those rules are mass-checked - - later -- the results are available on the web - - if results are good: - the rules are checked in - - if bad: - they're not. The failures are: - - there's too much human legwork involved. cut out requiring the committers to schlep stuff around just to test the rules. - - there's no defined way to feed back results from testing to the original contributor, which can result in stuff getting overlooked - - having to rename the rules is a bit of a mess. not sure if there is a good way to fix that though - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFC6rM+MJF5cimLx9ARAtkfAKCxUL+hTExgzYu5Z51HlcKxzuDLTQCgjghD PAoqrW8VCBQnoPRNOCASZY8= =c1M3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
