On 2/6/2014 5:33 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/6/2014 5:23 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Axb wrote:
On 02/06/2014 09:55 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 2/6/2014 1:10 PM, John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Axb wrote:
> > > On 02/06/2014 06:05 PM, Apache Jenkins Server wrote:
> > > See
<https://builds.apache.org/job/SpamAssassin-trunk/9383/changes>
> > > > > > > John
> > > > Pls copy __BUGGED_IMG to your sandbox.
> > Done.
> > Can you wait until the weekend to start cleaning stuff up?
>
+1 though until after Tuesday's launch? Sorry to put a hurdle in
front
of the clean up.
I was planning to wait for the next "sandbox rules report" anyway....
Been doing it slowly, trying not to break too much at once.
And I will start cleaning up my inter-sandbox dependencies this
weekend. That shouldn't break anything, though.
Question: if several contributors have the same rule in use in their
sandboxes after this cleanup, do we want per-contributor naming? Or
is that an indication that the rule should be made "permanent"?
Hmm, I use the initials so someone knows I wrote the rule. I'm not a
big fan of this copying rules from other sandboxes but I support AXB's
overall goal to clean things up and make masscheck more efficient.
But copying my rule and putting your initials in front of it will mess
up my system as well as likely irk rule authors.
Yuck... so here's what a collission does while packaging a release:
WARNING: __BUGGED_IMG: renamed as
__BUGGED_IMG_rulesrc_sandbox_khopesh_20_khop_experimental_cf due to
collision with existing rule
