R-Elists wrote on Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:56:22 -0800: > i appreciate your input, yet i really wanted Warren to answer for his blog > post on it in specific terms related to SA > > i can handle absolutes pretty easy... > > if we shouldnt use SARE with 3.3.x, no prob.
How long have you been following *this* list? Anyone following this list with open eyes and mind should have understood a long timee ago that SARE rules don't add much value nowadays and *in general* because the SA internal rules get updated regularly and have also incorporated some SARE rules. (* some rules or rulesets may still be adding good value to some people's mailsystems. Judge yourself.) > > yet if ambiguous, then it needs to get more granular in the text that help > and direct people > > in regards to 3.2.5, it makes a difference there too... > > since SARE isnt really supported anymore, realistically it should be pulled > and only used as a reference archive, or have HEAVY recommendations not to > use it and appropriate warnings. You may want to talk this out with the SARE maintainers. SARE has never been "officially" endorsed as a must-have, so there's no need to pull it "officially" either. I think it also helps to read the first page of the site. SARE has always made clear that you should not add rulesets blindly (*). You always have to track the results and then reconsider. If you did that and they are largely unhelpful you pulled them already and if they are still helpful you keep using "them" (or rather a subset of "them"). (* despite most people just doing that. The advice for these is very clear: don't use them.) Kai -- Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
