From jm@jmason.org  Tue Sep  3 14:38:29 2002
Return-Path: <yyyy@example.com>
Delivered-To: yyyy@example.com
Received: by example.com (Postfix, from userid 500)
	id 6798116F23; Tue,  3 Sep 2002 14:38:29 +0100 (IST)
Received: from example.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6221BF7A7; Tue,  3 Sep 2002 14:38:29 +0100 (IST)
To: "Craig R.Hughes" <craig@deersoft.com>
Cc: quinlan@pathname.com, yyyy@example.com (Justin Mason),
	spamassassin-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [SAdev] 2.41 release? 
In-Reply-To: Message from "Craig R.Hughes" <craig@deersoft.com> 
   of "Mon, 02 Sep 2002 22:37:10 PDT." <312D1C89-BEFF-11D6-9DD0-00039396ECF2@deersoft.com> 
From: yyyy@example.com (Justin Mason)
X-GPG-Key-Fingerprint: 0A48 2D8B 0B52 A87D 0E8A  6ADD 4137 1B50 6E58 EF0A
X-Habeas-Swe-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-Swe-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-Swe-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-Swe-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-Swe-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-Swe-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-Swe-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-Swe-8: Message (HCM) and not spam.  Please report use of this
X-Habeas-Swe-9: mark in spam to <http://www.habeas.com/report/>.
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 14:38:24 +0100
Sender: yyyy@example.com
Message-Id: <20020903133829.6798116F23@example.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.2 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,HABEAS_SWE,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      SPAM_PHRASE_02_03
	version=2.41-cvs
X-Spam-Level: 


"Craig R.Hughes" said:

> Seems like a good idea.  We might get one of two other issues 
> raised tomorrow too once US people get back to work tomorrow and 
> start downloading 2.40 in earnest.

yep, I reckon that's likely.

BTW I'm hearing reports about problems resolving spamassassin.org.
Anyone else noticing this?  if it's serious I'll see if I can get
Mark Reynolds to add a 2ndary in the US, to go with the primaries
in Oz.

> >    - looks like there may be a razor2 issue

I think this is a Razor bug/glitch triggered when file permissions
don't allow its own log system to work.  At least that's the report
I heard on the Razor list in the past...

Theo, does it work now that you /dev/null'd the logfile?

> >    - version number (says "cvs")
> >    - tag tree as "Rel" this time too

I won't bother tagging with Rel, IMO; I don't think we should
rely on the version control system inside our code, so I've just
put a line in Mail/SpamAssassin.pm instead.   I will of course
tag with a release *label* though.

--j.