On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:49:44PM -0500, Warren Togami wrote: > Duncan Findlay wrote: > >The only problem I see with the above, is that no script should be > >overwriting rules that are distributed in a package. So if I > >distribute a spamassassin-rules .deb, which would stick files in > >/usr/share/spamassassin, no script should go in and overwrite those > >rules. sa-update should be writing to somewhere in > >/var/lib/spamassassin (or /var/cache/spamassassin ?) and > >spamassassin/spamd should be reading from that location if it exists. > > > >So, looks like spamassassin/spamd probably needs to be modified to > >read from /var/lib/spamassassin if we want sa-update to work this way. > > > > I am in agreement that sa-update should download rules/scores into > somewhere in /var, and it shouldn't overwrite files distributed by the > package. I am not so sure I like the separate co-dependent package for > scores thing as a requirement.
Right. I also don't see any need to split the rules out of the main package -- spamassassin just needs to be smart enough to use the right set of rules -- either where sa-update drops them or where they are installed by default. > I am a little confused about the terminology, active-set means network > tests right? I believe "active-set" refers to the latest scored set of rules -- the idea being that rules will be updated more often than code. -- Duncan Findlay
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
