Theo Van Dinter said:
> Originally the statement was "Razor2 support is a big change, we > should wait for 2.4", and now it's "2.4 will take a while, we should > release 2.32." The semi-software engineer in me says we should leave > 2.3[1-9] as maintenance releases and wait for 2.40 for R2 support. > The spamassassinator in me says the R2 code is stable, it's the Razor2 > code that may have problems, but that's not our project. > > Attachments 198 and 211 (in order) go against the 2.3x code, which is > what I'm currently running with. It'd go well with some of the other > fixes that have come through against 2.31. :) BTW those patches are in CVS at the moment, and it seems to work -- although I seem to recall some questions on the razor list about Razor matching anything, and I haven't seen many hits in the past few days, but I haven't had any time to investigate, myself :( The current CVS version seems nice code-wise, but the scores need a lot of tweaking, and there's a few rules that need to be modified to reduce FPing, I reckon. --j. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Stuff, things, and much much more. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
