> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 9:03 PM > To: Theo Van Dinter > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: 3.2 and 3.3 proposal > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Theo Van Dinter writes: > > On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 10:14:18PM -0700, Dan Quinlan wrote: > > > cycle has become so long. I'd like us to create a 3.2 > branch for stable > > > development focused on a release in 4 months (3 months > development and 1 > > > month for release): > > > > > > - new rules > > > - a new set of scores and perceptron run not too long > into future > > > > These can now easily be done with sa-update, and it can be done more > > often than once every 3-4 months. ;) > > > > I'd rather see us focus on a stable 3.1, backport rules and do score > > generation updates via sa-update, and leave new > functionality for a 3.2 > > release in the 3-4 month time frame. > > > > I've been wondering if splitting the rules into a subproject would > > serve everyone better as well. Have that focus > specifically on rules, > > score generation, and the sa-update stuff, while those of > us who enjoy > > the code side of things can mainly focus on engine updates, > etc, with > > plugin writing going between the two. I think there may be > more traction > > getting new rules in place faster with more people involved > if the two were > > split, since people can write rules pretty easily but the > engine takes some > > getting used to. ;) > > +1. I definitely think this is worthwhile, and I think there's > proving to be too much work, the current way.
Thread being watched closely by SARE members. Do you have anything in mind for speeding up the rule process? Splitting out the GA runs? Doing mini mass checks like SARE? Who will be working on the rule project? Will the NHL be back next year? Trying to peacfully bridge the gap, --Chris
