https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7826
--- Comment #75 from Henrik Krohns <apa...@hege.li> --- My rolling back trunk refers specifically to: - Rules (sa-update) - RaciallyCharged plugin (which I'd really like to see go away anyway) - Conf::feature_blocklist_welcomelist (as commented before) - Above mean frankly any committed code, which should be reviewed again.. Rolling back would offer a clean slate and not confuse people by ending up in 4.0. Of course there is a slight chance that someone using trunk during these few years is actually using the newly named features/functions directly. However, this seems quite unlikely and a small heads up on the list would probably be enough. If you like that things should be left as is in the 4.0 release and rules, I'm fine with that too, as I only really care about getting 4.0 out. In my professional opinion it just seems dumb. I'm not saying that trunk isn't "unstable" per se, but it's already communicated numerous times that 3.4 is pretty much deprecated and trunk is considered somewhat "stable" as it's used for mass-checking also. I know people are using trunk in production, and I've even advocated it personally. It really should not be a generic testing bed for this scale of change, this feature should have never been committed to trunk and rules for testing purposes as KAM claimed. It would have been trivial to develop and test locally against different 3.4 configs. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
