Warren Togami writes: > Justin Mason wrote: > > Warren Togami writes: > >> Justin Mason wrote: > >>> Quanah Gibson-Mount writes: > >>>> --On Friday, March 14, 2008 3:36 PM +0000 Justin Mason <[EMAIL > >>>> PROTECTED]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> ok, what bugs really need to be fixed for 3.3.0? feel free to set > >>>>> Priority on bugs on the 3.3.0 milestone. in my opinion this is the > >>>>> only real blocker: > >>>> <http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4416> please > >>>> please > >>>> please. :) > >>> unfortunately, there's no patch there, and it appears that BerkeleyDB > >>> doesn't support upgrading of .db files anyway. unlikely to get in, > >>> given that! > >> How are the 3.3.0 plans coming along? > > > > Hmm. things have been pretty quiet -- I think we're all a bit distracted > > by other, non-SpamAssassin-related stuff, unfortunately. > > > > I've been meaning to try to push it along, the big work items are: > > > > - fixing the distribution process to work without rules in the dist > > tarball (since we'll be moving to a model where with distribute > > without rules and they're downloaded by the admin on install). > > > > - generating automated daily scores with Daryl. this is kind of complex > > since it relies on having good rule-QA data coming in with the > > "reuse=yes" flag set, and I'm not sure what our current status is > > there. > > > > Should 5899 be fixed before 3.3.0? It seems to be a potential cause of > upgrade confusion.
yes.
