https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7397
--- Comment #14 from Michael P <[email protected]> --- (In reply to RW from comment #12) > (In reply to Michael P from comment #8) > > > I also propose that going forward ONLY the channels.d configuration be used, > > rather than the older method of accepting just a single channel file > > structure. > > IMO the best way to use sa-update on multiple channels is to run it on one > channel at a time. That way the shell script knows which channels have > updated and which have failed. For example it may be useful to delete minor > channels failing lint automatically rather than have them hold-up updates to > core rules. I'd rather not lose this flexibility. > > There are also other uses for command-line overrides, such as > trouble-shooting, or downloading a channel just to look at the rules. The script (eg sa-remote-update) should not preclude the ability to circle through each of the channels, and the ones that fail lint will simply not get applied, and an error message sent to the admin, with the remaining channels being applied. It should also not preclude some one from deciding to explicitly update channel by channel, should they choose to do so, instead of simply performing by default, do every channel in the channels.d directory, if they are set as active. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
