Jim Maul writes: > Justin Mason wrote: > > Jim Maul writes: > >> Kelson wrote: > >>> Jason Haar wrote: > >>>> May I propose that sa-update should become merged into spamd? (or > >>>> daemonized) > >>> Merging would be bad. There are plenty of us using methods other than > >>> spamd to call SpamAssassin. > >> I dont think anyone is using spamd to call SpamAssassin. > > > > ??? > > > > one over here ;) > > oh? Care to explain how spamd would call spamassassin? That would be a > neat trick ;)
ah, I see where you're going! Although in fact, you could say it's a valid way to put it -- after all, spamd is just a script which calls the Mail::SpamAssassin modules. ;) --j.
