I think this is a great idea.. It may also be useful, if this is going to be automated to have buckets for the rules based on the output of mass checks.
Something like agressive rules, netrual rules, and lenient rules based on their catching of spam/ham. That way someone grabbing them that may not have full knowledge of how everything works does not turn around and say "I downloaded X rule from SVN and it caught Y Ham, why?" Ron Original Message: ----------------- From: Chris Santerre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:57:51 -0500 To: dev@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: RE: proposal: an automated rule-qa system >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:16 PM >To: dev@spamassassin.apache.org >Subject: proposal: an automated rule-qa system > *SNIP* > >We add a web-app somewhere that periodically scrapes bugzilla >for bugs on the "rules" component which contain some token from trusted >users indicating that they contain rules that need testing. > >That then extracts rules from attachments/text on that bug, and > *SNIP* >Sound useful? That should at least take some legwork out of rule QA, >and stop us committers being a bottleneck in the process. +1 ;) Although the ninjas have been really slow to find new rules, as spam is getting caught so well now. --Chris -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
