On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 09:25:45PM -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > standards because I feel that rules built-in to SA have to really be of the > highest quality. The recent addition of sa-update may change my position > on that.
I'm not sure why sa-update would change your position. Just because we can get rules published and unpublished quickly doesn't mean the rules can be lower quality. > Finally, allowing to sa-update to quickly use these new rules would be > ideal. I would setup thresholds (some automatic) like: Something like this is sort of in place. We have automatic "graduation" nightly based on mass-check results, though there are still issues to work out with it. It's only working for 3.2 at the moment. > This would allow something akin to sa-update --threshold=experimental which > in addition to the new SA rules would also get the rules that are > experimental. FYI, in sa-update parlance, those would be different channels. ie: sa-update --channel expirimental.spamassassin.org or some such. Right now just the main channel (updates) is in use because we don't have any other ones ready yet. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: Cat \kat'\ n. 1: A dog with an attitude problem
pgpSEMz5OxczY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
