I am working to upgrade spamassassin, from 2.60 to 3.0, on my RedHat 8
Mailserver.
I'm currently running mimedefang 2.37. I have found no references to a
required version of Mimedefang in the docs, and would like to avoid changing
the entire world at once.
Does anyone know of any problems
On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 16:52 -0500, Larry Starr wrote:
I am working to upgrade spamassassin, from 2.60 to 3.0, on my RedHat 8
Mailserver.
I'm currently running mimedefang 2.37. I have found no references to a
required version of Mimedefang in the docs, and would like to avoid changing
Larry Starr wrote:
I'm currently running mimedefang 2.37. I have found no references to a
required version of Mimedefang in the docs, and would like to avoid changing
the entire world at once.
The UPGRADE file goes into this to some extent. It doesn't mention
MIMEDefang by name, but the
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 03:07:08PM -0700, Kelson wrote:
(Developers: It might be worth mentioning the minimum 3.0-compatible
versions for MD, Amavis, and other popular things-that-call-SA.)
Why?
How are developers supposed to know what popular versions of
software support/use SpamAssassin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Parker writes:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 03:07:08PM -0700, Kelson wrote:
(Developers: It might be worth mentioning the minimum 3.0-compatible
versions for MD, Amavis, and other popular things-that-call-SA.)
Why?
How are developers
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 03:21:44PM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
Well, it would be *nice*. I think it's reasonable to assume
that MIMEDefang and amavisd certainly need this, given the very
large amount of bug reports we've been getting.
So long as our notes state that we don't actively follow
