On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:18:41 -0400
Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Stevan Bajić <ste...@bajic.ch> wrote:
>
> > { stats }
> > Fragile? UHA! You really need to reevaluate your Anti-Spam solution.
> > Whatever you use it should NOT be fragile. Resource intensive is another
> > thing but fragile? Fragile in a server environment? This should not be the
> > case regardless what Anti-Spam solution you use.
> >
>
> That is my point. The old installation instructions were a disaster (and
> made it -very- easy to screw up upgrades - "oops, 2 versions ago you
> selected these options, and now that you have added this unrelated option
> I'm just going to fail to work".) I accept that it may be better now, and
> I'm going to consider upgrading instead of just replacing, but at the end of
> the day I need something that goes in and "just works". I don't need it to
> do a million billion db operations constantly, I just need it to catch the
> small amounts of spam that we accept these days.
>
> Part of why I'm reevaluating is that postfix-policyd did as much to stop
> spam as dspam did. We were accepting on the order of 25k spam messages a day
> before dspam (circa 3.6.x). With dspam they were nearly all caught - and the
> false-spam rate was very low, so the spam folder could be left to languish.
> Once postfix-policyd started greylisting, honeypot-banning and so forth, it
> went down to 1-300 a day and dspam's accuracy cratered. Upgrading to 3.8
> (and clearing the old data out) helped some, but not a lot.
>
> With that in mind, after the disastrous (for the project/app)
> acquisition/forking/abandonment, I'm in no hurry to rush up to the newest
> version. And a lot of the discussion on the list before that release
> centered around "we should put -something- out so that people think its
> alive again" and less around a standard, reliable release.
>
You are wrong here. The time it took to produce 3.9.0 was around a year of
development. Not constant development but still a lot of development and
testing and and and... The main goal for 3.9.0 was: fix bugs, increase
stability, don't add new features (if not really, really, really necessary).
> (And today's "omg you use it so you -must- contribute!" message doesn't help
> the case.)
>
You -must- absolutely nothing.
> I'm not writing off dspam in my environments, but neither am I rushing to
> alphatest new versions of a historically unstable, fragile project.
>
Alphatest? The release is out since 1/2 year. The alphatest phase is long,
long, long ago done. You are in no way alphatesting. 3.9.0 is a stable release.
--
Kind Regards from Switzerland,
Stevan Bajić
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
Dspam-user mailing list
Dspam-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user
