https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6515
--- Comment #12 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> 2011-05-12 16:39:17 UTC --- > > My opinion is that it should be set to -99 because if you run out > > of time and haven't gotten to any negative scoring rules, the time > > out causes a FP. > > In the messages hitting the TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED in our log for the > past month (and examining their rule hits, score, and subject), > I can say that the rule hits which triggered during the first 45 seconds > of processing always yielded a reasonably good approximation of the > expected final score. One would be extremely unlucky if rules that > did trigger contributed a large positive score which would have been > counteracted by a large negative score of one of the rules which were > aborted. While it may theoretically be possible, I think that a mostly > neutral default score for TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED is a good approximation. > Assigning it a large negative score would counteract the whole idea > of why this was implemented in the first place (large spam messages > were often given a free pass). I'd like to keep it as it is. Sorry, my comment is meant for administrators that use this feature should consider setting this to -99. I'm not suggesting the patch change. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
