Re: 3.3.0 plans

> Justin Mason wrote:
> > Warren Togami writes:
> >> Justin Mason wrote:
> >>> Quanah Gibson-Mount writes:
> >>>> --On Friday, March 14, 2008 3:36 PM +0000 Justin Mason <jm@...>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> ok, what bugs really need to be fixed for 3.3.0?  feel free to set
> >>>>> Priority on bugs on the 3.3.0 milestone.  in my opinion this is the
> >>>>> only real blocker:
> >>>> <http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4416> please please
> >>>> please. :)
> >>> unfortunately, there's no patch there, and it appears that BerkeleyDB
> >>> doesn't support upgrading of .db files anyway.  unlikely to get in,
> >>> given that!
> >> How are the 3.3.0 plans coming along?
> >
> > Hmm. things have been pretty quiet -- I think we're all a bit distracted
> > by other, non-SpamAssassin-related stuff, unfortunately.
> >
> > I've been meaning to try to push it along, the big work items are:
> >
> >   - fixing the distribution process to work without rules in the dist
> >     tarball (since we'll be moving to a model where with distribute
> >     without rules and they're downloaded by the admin on install).
> >
> >   - generating automated daily scores with Daryl.  this is kind of complex
> >     since it relies on having good rule-QA data coming in with the
> >     "reuse=yes" flag set, and I'm not sure what our current status is
> >     there.
> >
>
> Should 5899 be fixed before 3.3.0?  It seems to be a potential cause of
> upgrade confusion.