> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Justin Mason wrote: > > jdow writes: > > >> Nor does it make sense to use a tool, even if supplied > with SpamAssassin, > >> that is broken for performing updates. > > > what's the "broken" part? > > Well, this may not qualify as broken, but I would say it's an > undesirable behavior that, upon successful download of the new > set of rules, it immediately deletes your old set of rules. > What happens if the new set is broken? There's no easy way > to revert to the last known good state. > > I would prefer a system where it downloads every update to a new > directory, then just changes a symlink to point to the newest > one, leaving the old one in place in case you want to revert. > Of course, this would require a system for expiring old updates > (since you don't want to have 100 copies of the rules sitting > around), but that shouldn't be too hard.
Symlinks aren't so easy when you're trying to be cross-platform. But they could easily tgz the ruleset to an archive subfolder using the old version number prior to replacing the rule set... At least for those people who are really sensitive about the update process. Note that the rules are only updated if they lint properly first. You could always add a bz ticket for the feature... I'm just happy that the tool actually works on Windows. Bret
