Thanks for the info Bob. I can wait! :)
What sort of time frame do expect to be working towards (won't hold you to it ;)?
Thanks Deon.
Robert Menschel wrote:
Hello Deon,
Monday, August 16, 2004, 3:36:45 PM, you wrote:
D> Hi
D> I am about to upgrade SA for the first time (from 2.61 to 2.64). What D> I am wanting to find out about is how do check whether rules which I D> have from SARE, for example, are now included by default in SA, or D> where default scores have changed significantly.
When will you be doing the upgrade?
I'm currently in the process of updating the General Subject, Header, and HTML rule sets to identify/eliminate the 2.64 and 3.0 duplications.
In addition to files 0 through 3 (0 being most conservative/safest rules, 3 being most aggressive/risky), I'm creating * "eng" files, for rules that work well in the English language but should be avoided by systems that get many emails written in other languages, * "x30" files, for rules included in 3.0.0 distribution * "x264" files, for rules included in the 2.64 distribution * "arc" files, for rules that no longer hit any spam
So when you migrate to 2.64, you'll want to avoid the x264 files.
D> Are these an issue or is it safe to just go ahead withe upgrade. I D> will obviously be doing significant testing, but have been wondering D> about these 2 particular issues.
Our scoring is conservative enough that it probably isn't an issue to begin with, and will be less of an issue when these updates to SARE are completed.
After these three, ratware.cf is my next to review for duplication, unless some other SARE Ninja beats me to it.
Bob Menschel
-- Deon de Villiers Technical Manager Hetzner Africa Tel: +27 21 970 2000 Fax: +27 21 970 2001 http://www.hetzner.co.za/index.php?id=245
[ * Awarded Top 50 ICT Company in South Africa for the period 2003/4 by the Corporate Research Foundation]
[ * Named National Top 300 High Growth Companies by DTI for the period 2004/5]
