Colin Alston wrote: > ClamAV has been continuously and repetitively adjusting configuration > options in such a way that breaks anything which is automatically > upgraded just stops working.
I agree that this is extremely hostile behaviour on the part of Clam developers. A friendlier approach: Version N: Option "Foo" exists. Version N+1: Option "Foo" is ignored, but elicits deprecation warnings. Version N+2: Option "Foo" causes a hard error. > I think ClamAV should be mature enough now to start respecting the > users it has and try to behave in a somewhat more stable way. Agreed. The hard failures are gratuitous. For those of you who say "Tough, read the docs", consider our position: We have hundreds of customers using ClamAV. Not all of them are diligent about upgrading. When (not if) a new release of Clam comes out that fixes some security problem, we have to get them to upgrade. In many cases, they are not very sophisticated UNIX/Linux users, so we get bombarded with help requests to help with the transition. In some cases, we have scripts that automatically "fix up" the configuration files, but this is a bit scary and not always reliable, depending on if and how the customer has modified the configuration file from our distributed version. Clam developers need to do serious work in two areas: Security and usability. I hope they will. Regards, David. _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
