On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 23:19, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 06:26:52AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> > Are we going to continue to use bugzilla.spamassassin.org or is that
> > moving over to an apache.org server too?
>
> For now it's staying where it is. The box is used for
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 23:54, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 09:35:49AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> > Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > >Fixed.
> >
> > What about setting the svn:eol-style property to 'native' on all the
> > text mode files? Is there a way of doing that in bulk?
>
>
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 09:35:49AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Duncan Findlay wrote:
> >Fixed.
>
> What about setting the svn:eol-style property to 'native' on all the
> text mode files? Is there a way of doing that in bulk?
I'm sure there's a way of doing it with find and xargs, but I don'
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 06:26:52AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Are we going to continue to use bugzilla.spamassassin.org or is that
> moving over to an apache.org server too?
For now it's staying where it is. The box is used for more than
bugzilla actually, and our bugzilla customizations p
Duncan Findlay wrote:
Fixed.
What about setting the svn:eol-style property to 'native' on all the
text mode files? Is there a way of doing that in bulk?
-- sidney
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 12:32:47PM -0600, Michael Parker wrote:
> Howdy All,
>
> I'm moving over to the subversion tree and I've found a few
> housekeeping things that need to be done. I think they all make
> sense, but since I've only had limited experience using subversion I'd
> love to hear of
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spamassassin-
|
Howdy All,
I'm moving over to the subversion tree and I've found a few
housekeeping things that need to be done. I think they all make
sense, but since I've only had limited experience using subversion I'd
love to hear of a different or better way to handle them.
1) The svn:ignore property needs
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2872
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|2.61 won't compile with its |2.61 won't compile its own
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2872
Summary: 2.61 won't compile with its default rules.
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 2.61
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P
Sander Striker wrote:
I want to monitor this project,
but I don't have a great interest in seeing
unfiltered filed bugs
That's my preference too, but a mail filter takes care of it easily.
I've been filtering mail from the spamassassin bugzilla-daemon to a
separate folder before the filter for th
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 17:28, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > Maybe you want a seperate bugs@ list for this? Or do you want it all
> > on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> We've discussed this in the past, and we figure that there'd be little
> traffic on the -dev list if we didn't have the bugzilla notices.
Fair
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 11:20:42AM +0100, Sander Striker wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 04:57, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > Also, bugzilla messages should go ONLY to bugzilla, NOT to the list,
> > or it will not get recorded properly in the bug. (or it will be seen
> > twice on the list)
>
> Maybe yo
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2536
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-12-29 04:30 ---
Sorry to be out.
I'm back now.
I will answer you tonigth after adding code after line 895.
cyrille
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 05:35, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 10:57:19PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > Could someone please adjust the list settings to not add the Reply-To:
> > header to each mail?
>
> Unfortunately, we don't have control over the list configs.
There is contro
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 04:57, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> Could someone please adjust the list settings to not add the Reply-To:
> header to each mail?
>
> I'm sure most are aware of this argument:
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
This has been discussed more than once at the ASF. Bot
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 8:35 PM
> To: Spam Assassin Dev
> Subject: Re: Reply-To: header on this list
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 10:57:19PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > Could someone please adjust the
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 10:57:19PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> Could someone please adjust the list settings to not add the Reply-To:
> header to each mail?
Unfortunately, we don't have control over the list configs. I've been
told that requests should be sent to the infrastructure@ list.
--
Could someone please adjust the list settings to not add the Reply-To:
header to each mail?
I'm sure most are aware of this argument:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Also, bugzilla messages should go ONLY to bugzilla, NOT to the list,
or it will not get recorded properly in the bug
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2856
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-12-28 19:23 ---
Subject: Re: [review] report_safe_copy_headers should preserve header order
correctly for Received
On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 05:18:48PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] w
On Mon, 2003-12-29 at 00:27, Leo Simons wrote:
> Hi gang,
>
> could someone (mentor or someone else involved) please
> start writing and filling out a status file for spamassassin?
I guess that's something for me to take care of. Maybe Dirk
is able to fill in some blanks since he has helped a lo
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
So for my dev area, I did:
$ svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/test/incubator/sa/trunk spamassassin-head
I downloaded the Win32 binary of svn and tried that. The good news is
that the same binary just works under both Win32 and Cygwin.
The bad news is that we have a probl
22 matches
Mail list logo
