SPECS: spamassassin.spec (RA-branch)

[Radoslaw Zielinski]

Paweł Gołaszewski <blues at ds.pg.gda.pl> [25-08-2003 14:12]:
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Radoslaw Zielinski wrote:
>> And I still think, that putting experimental / superfresh versions in Ra
>> is a bad idea.
> Some time ago you was shouting that PLD is ancient ;))

No, I wasn't.  I don't think PLD is ancient; Ra is.  And should stay
this way -- ancient and stable.  I don't have problem with that.  My
"shouting" said rather "where is my brand new enterprise-ready Ac?!". ;-)

>> SA 2.5x has been put there despite my protest and actually _happened_ to
>> be seriously broken.
> *What* is wrong and why nobody has told me that?

*Was* wrong.  With versions 2.5[0123].  2.50 was marked as unstable, but
made its way to RA-branch.  Now the history goes round with 2.60.

I don't really care about Ra itself (since mmazur digs a grave for it).
What I'm trying to say, is that we need a policy for what can go to the
stable line of the distribution.  The $Subject is a good example for it.

-- 
Radosław Zieliński <radek at karnet.pl>
[ GPG key: http://radek.karnet.pl/ ]

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-en/attachments/20040626/bc29ee1b/attachment-0002.bin