|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-users archives|
On Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:01:44 +0100
Karsten Bräckelmann <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 15:11 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > Is there much to set up? sa-update already has a --channel
> > argument. It seems to me all you need to do is put new DNSBLs in a
> > testing channel.
> New, let alone worthwhile, DNSBLs don't just pop up like that.
That's not really the point... I was trying to make the point that
having a separate channel for somewhat-experimental rules or rules
that might have a large performance impact might be a good idea. A
new RBL is (IMO) simply one example of seomthing not quite safe enough
for the main sa-update channel.