REMINDER - TAC Applications closes in 2 weeks for ACNA Montreal

[Forwarded by the PMC on request of the Travel Assistance Committee] Reminder that travel assistance applications for ApacheCon NA 2018 are still open but only for another 2 weeks! Please get your applications in NOW. We will be supporting ApacheCon NA Montréal, Canada on 24th - 29th September

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, David Jones wrote: Fedora is way too unstable to use for a server that you want to keep around for years. Accepted in general, not necessarily for SA. We're only talking about the Fedora SA packages. There is so much tweaking and customization to setting up a mail filt

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On Apr 17, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Bill Cole wrote: > > At my last job where there were supported RHEL machines, I asked a RH support > person a similar question regarding Postfix and got the answer: "If you want > Fedora, you know where to get it." I'd personally prefer using one of the 3rd-party

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 04/17/2018 05:19 PM, Bill Cole wrote: On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:54, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, David Jones wrote: On 04/17/2018 03:29 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Dave, why would it go into EPEL?  SpamAssassin is a core RPM. I will be updating my main SA platform servers to Cent

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 17 Apr 2018, at 18:13, David Jones wrote: Why hasn't the packaging in RHEL/CentOS been updated to 3.4.1? At my last job where there were supported RHEL machines, I asked a RH support person a similar question regarding Postfix and got the answer: "If you want Fedora, you know where to ge

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:54, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, David Jones wrote: On 04/17/2018 03:29 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Dave, why would it go into EPEL?  SpamAssassin is a core RPM. I will be updating my main SA platform servers to CentOS 7 this summer so this should be good t

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 04/17/2018 04:39 PM, Bill Cole wrote: On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:38, David Jones wrote: On 04/17/2018 03:29 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Dave, why would it go into EPEL?  SpamAssassin is a core RPM. Oh yeh.  I guess because it's been so long since we had an update and my main boxes are runnin

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 17 Apr 2018, at 16:38, David Jones wrote: On 04/17/2018 03:29 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Dave, why would it go into EPEL?  SpamAssassin is a core RPM. Oh yeh. I guess because it's been so long since we had an update and my main boxes are running CentOS/SL 6.9 that I forgot it was a cor

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, David Jones wrote: On 04/17/2018 03:29 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Dave, why would it go into EPEL?  SpamAssassin is a core RPM. I will be updating my main SA platform servers to CentOS 7 this summer so this should be good timing to get SA 3.4.2 from the core repo update

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On Apr 17, 2018, at 2:38 PM, David Jones wrote: > > The CentOS 5 and 6 boxes out there aren't going to get the new version unless > it gets put in some other repo like EPEL or another third party since they > are not getting any updates. EPEL 5 is frozen AFAIK. This would have to go into a 3r

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 04/17/2018 03:29 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Dave, why would it go into EPEL?  SpamAssassin is a core RPM. Oh yeh. I guess because it's been so long since we had an update and my main boxes are running CentOS/SL 6.9 that I forgot it was a core package. The CentOS 5 and 6 boxes out there

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

Dave, why would it go into EPEL? SpamAssassin is a core RPM. -- Kevin A. McGrail Asst. Treasurer & VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Amir Caspi wrote: > On A

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On Apr 17, 2018, at 1:12 PM, David Jones wrote: > > Once 3.4.2 comes out soon, we need to get an official version in EPEL or > something. Hopefully someone knows someone at EPEL to make this happen. I > think everyone had to build 3.4.1 themselves from the Fedora RPM spec file. > That hinde

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 04/17/2018 02:00 PM, Reio Remma wrote: Mkay. Half an evening of figuring out how RPM building works and voila. Let the testing commence. :) Running transaction   Updating   : spamassassin-3.4.2-0.el7.centos.x86_64   Cleanup    : spamassassin-3.4.1-17.el7.centos.x86_64   Verifying  : spama

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

Mkay. Half an evening of figuring out how RPM building works and voila. Let the testing commence. :) Running transaction   Updating   : spamassassin-3.4.2-0.el7.centos.x86_64   Cleanup    : spamassassin-3.4.1-17.el7.centos.x86_64   Verifying  : spamassassin-3.4.2-0.el7.centos.x86_64   Verifying 

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Computer Bob wrote: In this way, any user can move a mail to their .SpamLearn folder and it will get learned. It is a very bad idea to do that without review unless you *strongly* trust the judgement and responsibility of your use

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 11:19:57 -0500 Computer Bob wrote: > The problem I immediately see is that I get one big bayes of everyone > and a 'one for all, all for one' bayes config. > I would like to configure SA to be able to deal with the virtual > users individually somehow but don't know if it can

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Computer Bob wrote: In this way, any user can move a mail to their .SpamLearn folder and it will get learned. It is a very bad idea to do that without review unless you *strongly* trust the judgement and responsibility of your users. Allowing training without review may

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

I would like to thank everyone for your responses, they have been great. This maillist has not failed to help me improve things everytime I use it. So this particular server has virtual domains and virtual users in a folder hierarchy there under all owned by 'vmail' user. I have done the follow

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

Svn for 3.4 is very stable and suitable for most production level machines IMO. -- Kevin A. McGrail Asst. Treasurer & VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Alex w

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 15:44:25 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >> On 15.04.18 20:04, RW wrote: > >> >All setting bayes_path buys you here is the ability to run > >> >sa-learn and spamassassin as root, something you should *never* > >> >do anyway. > > >On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:55:13 +0200 >

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

Hi, > Can't wait for all the little fixes. For now I've carried some over by hand > to cut down on log errors (TxRep etc). Are you pulling from svn? I've been doing that for some time and it's stable and I'm assuming has all the current fixes. It requires you to build it yourself from scratch, b

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On 15.04.18 20:04, RW wrote: >All setting bayes_path buys you here is the ability to run sa-learn >and spamassassin as root, something you should *never* do anyway. On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:55:13 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: it's the only way to use per-user settings and bayes DB on syste

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

On 17.04.18 16:16, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: It was squashed by the pmc when the ruleqa was broken but happy to say it's in progress again and I will have an rc building again soon. On Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 09:13 Reio Remma > wrote: Greetings, any new on 3.4.2 re

Re: SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

It was squashed by the pmc when the ruleqa was broken but happy to say it's in progress again and I will have an rc building again soon. On Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 09:13 Reio Remma wrote: > Greetings, > > any new on 3.4.2 release? I read that testing was done a year ago, but > everything is silent af

SpamAssassin 3.4.2.

Greetings, any new on 3.4.2 release? I read that testing was done a year ago, but everything is silent after that. :) Thanks! Reio

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:55:13 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 15.04.18 20:04, RW wrote: > >All setting bayes_path buys you here is the ability to run sa-learn > >and spamassassin as root, something you should *never* do anyway. > > it's the only way to use per-user settings and bayes

Re: Differing scores on spamassassin checks

On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:31 -0500 Computer Bob wrote: Update: For this location, it is ok to have a central bayes database, so I turned off AWL, adjusted local.cf to contain: bayes_path /Central_Path/bayes_db/bayes bayes_file_mode 0777 On 15.04.18 20:04, RW wrote: Don't set 0777. If that's s