http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5751
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-12-28 19:52 ------- Suggestion to maybe get around the impasse here: When SA is first installed (initially, or as an upgrade) a check is made to see if the updates directory exists. If not, it is created and the rules supplied with the package are copied into this directory. This should be done as part of the installation process, NOT as part of any normal SA activity. SA will no longer look in the original rules location for rules, only in the updates hierarchy. If the user does not use an SA update channel the original rules will remain functional, but SA will only have to look in one place for rules, not two places with an override on the first. If the user is using an SA update channel, obviously updated rules will override the package rules in the normal manner; it will simply be the case of a newer update replacing an older update. For the rare case of packagers of third party software that do not wish to use either the native SA rules nor SA rule updates, they only have to add a final installation step to remove the default SA rules from the update directory that were installed by an earlier installation step. Note that it might be simpler all around to simply re-home the package rules to the updates directory in the first place, and remove the code that copies from the current rules location to the updates directory. The one drawback I can see with doing this is that on an upgrade the package rules would/might override any current update SA rules in the updates directory. OTOH rules tend to change between releases, so this might be a good thing. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
