Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: I simply wrote a patch to make it work. I'm not a maintainer of the package, if they want to modify it to make it work along side with the existing stuff, go right ahead. We are not using the older --enable-spam-command stuff with our customers, so the patch I made doesn't affect any of them, other than allowing their users to enable/disable spamassassin scanning themselves. OK, let me put it this way. If I was a committer and I went and pulled out what you put in and put something in there that better suits my personal needs, would my commit bit get pulled? It simply would have been nice if you had left the old option intact and let people choose if they want the integrated spamc options or the not so integrated but much more flexible spamc options. At the very least, can you document this in the CHANGELOG and README files? People besides you and your customers do use this code, that's why the project is over at SF. Thanks, Charles -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! . Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Thursday 01 April 2004 02:03 am, Charles Sprickman wrote: On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: I simply wrote a patch to make it work. I'm not a maintainer of the package, if they want to modify it to make it work along side with the existing stuff, go right ahead. We are not using the older --enable-spam-command stuff with our customers, so the patch I made doesn't affect any of them, other than allowing their users to enable/disable spamassassin scanning themselves. OK, let me put it this way. If I was a committer and I went and pulled out what you put in and put something in there that better suits my personal needs, would my commit bit get pulled? It simply would have been nice if you had left the old option intact and let people choose if they want the integrated spamc options or the not so integrated but much more flexible spamc options. At the very least, can you document this in the CHANGELOG and README files? People besides you and your customers do use this code, that's why the project is over at SF. I agree Charles. I'll work with Jeremy on keeping the old code in and adding the new code as a new option. I've always tried to keep each release of qmailadmin (and vpopmail) backwardsly compatible. Ken Jones
Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: I suggest the goal should be to let vpopmail do the work and make qmailadmin as much as possible just a web interface to the vpopmail library. yea, but there's that old spam command stuff which is interfering with the changes I'm making. Well, it's not really old. In fact, I use it. I just wrote it to stomp on the old stuff since we have no customers actually using the --enable-spam-command stuff, and have high demand for being able to switch the spamassassin stuff on/off on a per user basis via qmailadmin. Could you define stomp? Does this mean I have to go undo all of this everytime I update vpopmail/qmailadmin? I also noticed in browsing cvs for the vpopmail changes for spamassassin, there's a ton of changes, but no documentation. CHANGELOG, README, etc. remain untouched by kbo. Who is currently making decisions like should we alter the existing spamass support and where does one make their voice heard about such matters? Thanks, Charles I'm making a second post to actually post the patch. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! . Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 20:09, Charles Sprickman wrote: On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: I suggest the goal should be to let vpopmail do the work and make qmailadmin as much as possible just a web interface to the vpopmail library. yea, but there's that old spam command stuff which is interfering with the changes I'm making. Well, it's not really old. In fact, I use it. I just wrote it to stomp on the old stuff since we have no customers actually using the --enable-spam-command stuff, and have high demand for being able to switch the spamassassin stuff on/off on a per user basis via qmailadmin. Could you define stomp? Does this mean I have to go undo all of this everytime I update vpopmail/qmailadmin? the change I made basically removes the old --enable-spam-command functionality. If you have existing .qmail files that have it, it should work fine. Who is currently making decisions like should we alter the existing spamass support and where does one make their voice heard about such matters? I simply wrote a patch to make it work. I'm not a maintainer of the package, if they want to modify it to make it work along side with the existing stuff, go right ahead. We are not using the older --enable-spam-command stuff with our customers, so the patch I made doesn't affect any of them, other than allowing their users to enable/disable spamassassin scanning themselves. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! . Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: My question is: qmailadmin already has some spamassassin support, and I'm trying to modify qmailadmin to support the new spamassassin stuff, so is it ok to remove the old stuff and put the new stuff in? As someone who uses the old scheme, I'd say that I wouldn't like to have my setup broken. I personally don't like the idea of tying spamc into vpopmail; I think letting the sysadmin choose their filtering method is much more flexible. Right now I have people able to turn spam filtering on/off in webmail, and I just use the standard squirrelmail SA plugin so that they can alter settings. Or should I try to have support for both? Yes. I think it's only fair that if you change something you leave a configure flag around for those that don't want the new feature. Thanks, Charles -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! . Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
RE: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
hi Jeremy, thanks for your work :) I think if you could create a web page, where change our spamassassin config (like required_hits, or if you use dcc, pyzor, or razor, etc) only if we check the enable_spam_command box, that would be nice :) qmailadmin is a good tool for vpopmail, but will be better (in my opinion) with spamassassin and tmda implementations. thanks for your support and work, Jeremy Regards Andrea
RE: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 14:23, Andrea Riela wrote: thanks for your work :) no problem :) I think if you could create a web page, where change our spamassassin config (like required_hits, or if you use dcc, pyzor, or razor, etc) only if we check the enable_spam_command box, that would be nice :) that's in the works. We had high demands for having the ability for a user to be able to turn spamassassin on or off for their account, so first thing's first. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! . Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
Jeremy Kitchen wrote: I see that it is in the plans for vpopmail to merge in the new spamassassin features that Ken has written support for, which is great! My question is: qmailadmin already has some spamassassin support, and I'm trying to modify qmailadmin to support the new spamassassin stuff, so is it ok to remove the old stuff and put the new stuff in? Or should I try to have support for both? I suggest the goal should be to let vpopmail do the work and make qmailadmin as much as possible just a web interface to the vpopmail library. Rick p.s. I am still around, I just blew the engine in my truck and right now getting it rebuilt is my top priority.
Re: [qmailadmin] spamassassin support quick question
On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 11:20, Rick Widmer wrote: Jeremy Kitchen wrote: I see that it is in the plans for vpopmail to merge in the new spamassassin features that Ken has written support for, which is great! My question is: qmailadmin already has some spamassassin support, and I'm trying to modify qmailadmin to support the new spamassassin stuff, so is it ok to remove the old stuff and put the new stuff in? Or should I try to have support for both? I suggest the goal should be to let vpopmail do the work and make qmailadmin as much as possible just a web interface to the vpopmail library. yea, but there's that old spam command stuff which is interfering with the changes I'm making. I just wrote it to stomp on the old stuff since we have no customers actually using the --enable-spam-command stuff, and have high demand for being able to switch the spamassassin stuff on/off on a per user basis via qmailadmin. I'm making a second post to actually post the patch. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! . Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
