http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4982

           Summary: need automatic backporting of rules to 3.1.x from trunk
           Product: Spamassassin
           Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: major
          Priority: P3
         Component: sa-update
        AssignedTo: [email protected]
        ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Currently, sa-update packages are auto-generated from SVN trunk; once the rule
is checked in to a sandbox, everything proceeds on autopilot from there, which
is great.

However, the same is not true for the 3.1.x maintainance branch; unfortunately,
good rules have to be manually backported to there (generally by Theo).
This is suboptimal.   

(It's pretty silly, too, since what's the point of generating sa-update packages
for svn trunk, when everyone who needs sa-update is running a release version
instead? ;)

It should be possible to check in a rule, and have it appear in the sa-update
package for day+1 or day+2, in both 3.1.x and trunk packages.


How's about these options?

- (a) we write a script that takes a selection of rules, based on their
mass-check results in trunk (the nightly mass-checks), and auto-promotes them on
the assumption that they will have similar hitrates.   It will not autopromote
rules that fail a --lint with SA 3.1.x, or rules that require plugins.  It will
also have a hand-maintained exclusion list, so that we can cause rules to be
excluded for other reasons based on regexp patterns in the rule text.

- OR (b) we set up a small-scale nightly mass-check using 3.1.x, on the zone, in
parallel with the existing trunk nightly mass-checks.   We then generate 3.1.x
sa-update packages from that.  It doesn't have to be of the same scale as the
"real" nightly mass-checks... just enough to provide useful hit-rate data for
autopromotion.  (I think I like this idea.)



Any other suggestions?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to