Duncan Findlay wrote: [...] > > The only thing is that we tend to have new features ready for release much > faster, rather than waiting for hundreds of them, so this would be a > problem, new features that are quite stable don't get to the users fast > enough. > >
Uh, based on Justin's new traveling schedule, and the crunch that practically everyone else on the devlopment team as said they've found them selves in, I suspect that the pace of releases going "golden" will slow down rapidly. Having a two-pronged development model allows us to get patches/fixes/increamental feature-adds quickly into production with a minimum of fuss/reconfiguration. When you're working with a server(s) passing 10K-100K (1M?) messages a day, that's VERY important. I'd say that if you have "2.0.x" and you download "2.0.y" (where x < y) you should be able to do the "....; make install" and make little or no modifications to your configuration files to have a running system. If you go from "2.1.x" to "2.1.y" (where x < y) then there is potential for major changes, include restructuring/adding/dropping database tables, splitting up/merging/relocating cf files, upgrading/installing Perl or Perl modules. The same holds true for going from "2.x.?" to "2.y.?" (where x < y). If these rules are followed, it will make SA much easier to administer and still allow rapid bug-fixes and feature adds (like the auto-whitelist and sql stuff) that are _very_ important to certain implimentations. Don -- -------------------------------------------------------- Donald L. Greer, Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] System Administrator Voice: 512-300-0176 AustinTX http://www.AustinTX.COM/ All opinions are my own. Flame me directly. "I don't necessarily believe software should be free... but if you pay for it, it should work!" -- Me _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
