On 5/13/2017 9:50 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
I am not sure about my goal since it may be in slight conflict with your goal. :) I would like SA to be a little more toward a complete spam filter out of the box so people don't have to spend years learning all of the ins and outs to make it effective. I understand that SA can't be complete out of the box for every mail environment is a little different but I feel that it could be improved a little more with some default rules.
I support you adding it. So it's helpful for you to know where I'm coming from AND that I support differing goals. We are volunteers so there is no necessity for a hugely unified vision.

And note that I have supported and kept masscheck/ruleqa going as best I could for two decades with significant resources starting even prior to project under SA. Even though I do not use the results of either system in production.

Will do. I thought about leaving it out since we aren't using that DNS server anymore.
Brian's longtime support of this project and his visibility in the OSS community are more valuable than you might know.

I hope we can figure out something to get him back in the mix and keep him interested in helping!

This is a link in the "Hidden Slave" on the DNS Hosting table. I you want it more prominent, then I can change the link to show the URL.
I'm sure it is fine and I just missed it.

Is the "incoming" server still around? I wasn't able to resolve it in DNS yesterday or today.
Yes, it's named incoming.spamassassin.org. I might have used a.o by accident. BTW, can you add a.o and s.a.o to the acronyms list?

This is documented under the SVN section. The RO and RW should be self explanatory to a sysadmin.
Fair enough.  Some hurdles are good to have :-)
It's not under the Workflow section but parallel with the Onboarding so new people would see it. After you read the acronymns once, you should have them down.
It's a source of reference for all admins that lives and breaths. Leaving it under Onboarding implies they never need to read it again which might prove false.

Do you want to document stuff twice and have to maintain it in two places?
The steps, yes.  perhaps not the exact details

So perhaps - Email [email protected] changes to - Subscribe to [email protected] and the instructions remain in the section below.

However, as evidenced by Bryan still working to onboard, simplification is needed. I want to specifically hold the hand of new sysadmins at least to the point where they can leave the nest to fly or flop.

Regards,
KAM

Reply via email to