On 13/03/2010 7:58 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > >> Well, maybe not quite. As recently mentioned we need to be careful >> about how we go about releasing new network rules. If a rule causes a >> new lookup to be done (including if, like in this case, other existing >> lookups shared by this rule are/could be disabled) we need to have a way >> to notify users of the rule being added. I suggested only adding new >> net rules in new code releases and ensuring they don't appear in old >> version updates by using "if version" lines. >> >> Daryl >> > > Agree on being careful but not sure I agree that net rules only get > released in new code. Net rules are a big part of an effective > anti-spam system but I see your point.
So, just release some code, whenever. Theo and I released 3.1 versions every month for a while. Somebody just needs the tuits to do it. We have to have a way to give people heads up about new net rules. Releasing net rules without a heads up is unfair to both the users and DNSBL operators. Imagine releasing a new net rule to 100 sites that process 50 million messages a day. That could be un-good for an unsuspecting DNSBL operator. Releasing a new net rule with a new version allows us to give users a heads up and DNSBL operators time to slowly ramp up query volume capacity. > However, in light of your position, I believe I am right that this is a > "simple" matter of testing a new net rule for 3.3.X branch from my > original response? Yeah, I'd just use whatever rules get generated by the weekly score gen for net rules. Do note that if the rule has been committed it had better have "if version" lines around it. Otherwise it's probably going to get released in an update in about 4 hours. Daryl
