Resending with correct dev list :-)
On 5/5/2019 6:10 AM, Paul Stead wrote:
> Promotions and tags still seem to be a little problematic at the moment. A
> run of build/mkupdates/listpromotable locally shows +300 lines difference
> to active.list over the one being submitted.
Before I deal with
On 5/5/2019 6:10 AM, Paul Stead wrote:
> Promotions and tags still seem to be a little problematic at the moment. A
> run of build/mkupdates/listpromotable locally shows +300 lines difference
> to active.list over the one being submitted.
Before I deal with this issue:
+Dev.
TL;DR: REMINDER:
Promotions and tags still seem to be a little problematic at the moment. A
run of build/mkupdates/listpromotable locally shows +300 lines difference
to active.list over the one being submitted.
On 3 May 2019, at 2:05, Paul Stead wrote:
The interesting part which was showing yesterday was
---8<---
t/basic_lint.t .. ok
t/basic_lint_without_sandbox.t .. ok
FSL_BULK_SIG depends on __DKIMWL_WL_HI which is nonexistent
FSL_BULK_SIG depends on __DKIMWL_WL_HI which is
The interesting part which was showing yesterday was
---8<---
t/basic_lint.t .. ok
t/basic_lint_without_sandbox.t .. ok
FSL_BULK_SIG depends on __DKIMWL_WL_HI which is nonexistent
FSL_BULK_SIG depends on __DKIMWL_WL_HI which is nonexistent
# Failed test at t/basic_meta.t line
On 2 May 2019, at 4:44, Paul Stead wrote:
On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 17:43, Bill Cole <
sa-bugz-20080...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote:
...
The resulting generate-new-scores.sh was a mangled mess, with
r1815390
being the committed version in trunk. I've fixed this up.
I've also committed a
On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 17:43, Bill Cole <
sa-bugz-20080...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> The resulting generate-new-scores.sh was a mangled mess, with r1815390
> being the committed version in trunk. I've fixed this up.
>
> I've also committed a change made locally on sa-vm1 to
>
On 5/1/19 7:59 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Adding sysadmins@
Dave, I am guessing something got left in a previous run when svn
commit's failed. Can you or I delete a check out dir that is cruft?
I'm thinking a run went bad in february and couldn't commit. I figure
it should re-export, etc.?
On 1 May 2019, at 8:59, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Adding sysadmins@
Dave, I am guessing something got left in a previous run when svn
commit's failed. Can you or I delete a check out dir that is
cruft?
I'm thinking a run went bad in february and couldn't commit. I
figure
it should
Adding sysadmins@
Dave, I am guessing something got left in a previous run when svn
commit's failed. Can you or I delete a check out dir that is cruft?
I'm thinking a run went bad in february and couldn't commit. I figure
it should re-export, etc.?
Regards,KAM
On 5/1/2019 5:59 AM, Paul Stead
Howdy!
As per -
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/984ee3c26163e0281727256eabf0f29079a3fc053664416f58581ba0@%3Csysadmins.spamassassin.apache.org%3E
It looks as though the /tags commit is broken too -
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/tags/?view=log
---8<---
11 matches
Mail list logo
