Op zondag 25 maart 2012 00:21:36 schreef Colin Guthrie: > 'Twas brillig, and Thomas Spuhler at 24/03/12 22:49 did gyre and gimble: > > On Saturday, March 24, 2012 12:36:06 PM Sander Lepik wrote: > >> On Mar 24, 2012 9:13 PM, "Thomas Spuhler" <tho...@btspuhler.com> wrote: > >>> please push clamav-0.97.4 > >>> -- > >>> Best regards > >>> Thomas Spuhler > >> > >> Why? > >> > >> -- > >> Sander > > > > it's an upgrade from 0.97.4 > > We need to provide the newest version of the antivirus package > > This, by itself, is not a very good explanation. > > If this is purely a definitions update then that's fine. > If this is a bugfix update that's probably fine too (depending on the bug) > If it's a new feature update then that likely won't make it. > > People are all very busy. It only takes the person requesting the push a > minute or two to describe things properly. Please give your busy > colleagues the respect they deserve and provide good explanations to > save them having to spend time discussing and asking further questions. > > We still don't really have enough information to decide on this one! > > So please state whether it's just definitions or bugfix (and if so what > bugs) etc. > > Col
IIUC older clamav engines aren't supported, and stop working. but the reason given was indeed not enough. keep in mind that new features for this often means a security fix :-D i think this'll likely go through, but the original poster should check to see how things are, and report them accurately.