http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4982
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-10 12:30 -------
Theo had some comments (via IM) but hasn't posted them yet. To summarise,
before I forget -- iirc, he would prefer to see the 3.1.x branch being the main
branch against which mass-checks and ruleqa measures accuracy and the updates
are built, instead of trunk.
This initially seems problematic, but with a bit of thought, maybe not so much.
why should rule development measure against trunk, after all? for code
development, that makes sense, but most of the rule development doesn't need to
use the latest code.
so I'm thinking that maybe the easiest thing to do is:
1. set up a 3.1.x-based mass-checks/ruleqa/mkupdates infrastructure, in parallel
to the existing trunk one (creating duplicate infrastructure will be a lot
easier than modifying the existing one to support two outputs instead of one)
2. switch many/most of the mass-checks over to the 3.1.x base
3. add a few extra mass-checks for trunk
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
