On 05/13/2017 09:04 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
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.
Did you mean "rules" when you have "goals" here in the Goals section?
"KAM: Apache SpamAssassin is a framework for writing goals."
If so I will correct that on the wiki.
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?
Did I miss something? I am not sure myself what A.O. and S.A.O.
acronyms are. Is A.O. apache.org, and S.A.O spamassassin.apache.org? I
have never seen these before.
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.
Moved up one level. Do you want them moved up to the top level?
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.
Got it updated.
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.
I think the documentation we have out there now greatly simplifies
everything just being able to read the onboarding workflow. It was very
raw and recently unvetted when you setup my access.
Wikis are great for quickly putting information out there in an
organized way but they don't age well. As time goes on and things
change, someone has to update the wiki without knowing what has changed
unless we go through the process of onboarding someone every year.
Regards,
KAM
