spamassassin-sysadmins mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Merijn van den Kroonenberg" <>
Subject Re: Eureka: truncation of
Date Thu, 02 Nov 2017 12:40:58 GMT
The checkout works as you would expect. But its just very confusing a 
revision is used which is not inside the spamassassin project.
It might also cause side effects in other part of the process as David 
mentioned. But the check out part is not actually broken.

I do have some considerable experience with subversion....the problem is 
more what the intention of the code should be ;)

-----Original Message----- 
From: Kevin A. McGrail
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2017 1:27 PM
To: Merijn van den Kroonenberg ; David Jones ;
Subject: Re: Eureka: truncation of

+sysadmins@s.a.o so we don't lose these conversations.

Consider asking for his help on SVN.  I simply don't
play with enough tags, branches, revisions, etc.

Either there is a bug and we are injecting the wrong version, or you are
just looking at things incorrectly.

However, I think you perhaps are just doing something wrong??

This command, for example, appears to pull an SA rule set.  Isn't that
the expected behavior?

svn co -r 1813595
trunk-new-rules-set1  | more
A    trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc
A    trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/
A    trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/sandbox
A    trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin
A trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/
A trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/
A trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/
A trunk-new-rules-set1/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/

What do you get?


On 11/2/2017 5:29 AM, Merijn van den Kroonenberg wrote:
> I am a bit confused about corpus revision
> Take for example this:
> Revision: 1813664
> Author: spamassassin_role
> Date: zondag 29 oktober 2017 3:47:00
> Message:
> updated scores for revision 1813595 active rules added since last 
> mass-check
> And in the sysadmin mail from last night (rescore example)
> svn co -r 1813595 
> trunk-new-rules-set1
> So the commit mentions revision 1813595, I assume its also mentioned in 
> corpus logs and its actually checked out.
> BUT 1813595 is no valid revision for the spamassassin project??
> Its actually a revision in another apcache project.
> Revision: 1813595
> Author: deepak
> Date: zaterdag 28 oktober 2017 10:33:50
> Message:
> Improved: Add rat exclude files to excludes those files that does not need
> license header
> (OFBIZ-9856)
> Updated rat-excludes.txt file
> ----
> Modified : /ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk/rat-excludes.txt
> So is somewhere something wrong with detecting the correct revision?
> -----Original Message----- From: Kevin A. McGrail
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 10:49 PM
> To: David Jones ; Merijn van den Kroonenberg
> Subject: Re: Eureka: truncation of
> On 11/1/2017 5:31 PM, David Jones wrote:
>> I found another bug in the DKIM_VALID_EF rule description that needed to 
>> be wrapped in a version check that was causing the ruleset validation to 
>> fail with return code 4.  Just committed another fix that should take 
>> care of this.
>> The timing of the rule promotions and the masscheck validation, this 
>> could take another ~40 hours to work itself out.  I really want to 
>> improve the way things work to speed up this cycle time.
> Agreed.  I am very excited to finally have this done though.

View raw message