> On Mon, 05 Nov 2007, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > > spamassassin 3.2.3-0.volatile1 is currently available in > > etch-proposed/volatile. Before we accept it to etch/volatile i would > > like to ask some experienced SysAdmins to do some (more extended testing > > as we did) of the package and report back any problems you find to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > As soon as we are convinced that SA 3.2.3 works as expected i will > > move the package to etch/volatile and send an official announcement.
On 06.11.07 09:48, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > I wonder if spamassassin is volatile material? It certainly fits > backports.org (and I use the backport on production), but I have always > thought of volatile as something with exactly the same importance and > connotation as main. Imho, SA fulfills the requirements for volatile without any problem. The backports are here afaik for different reason. > IMO, it is best to leave stuff like spamassassin out of volatile. I disagree here. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. The 3 biggets disasters: Hiroshima 45, Tschernobyl 86, Windows 95 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
