This was when an update got generated when the last weekly set appeared to below the ham threshold. So I removed the check on the weekly set. That weekly set (20120623) still says 119126 hams (below threshold of 150000), if you click "source details" (you'll need to ctrl-f search the page for that).
So, why did we get an update on 20120629 when the last weekly update was below threshold? 2012-06-27 3.3.0 1352457 2012-06-27 3.3.1 1352457 2012-06-27 3.3.2 1352457 2012-06-28 3.3.0 1354373 2012-06-28 3.3.1 1354373 2012-06-28 3.3.2 1354373 2012-06-29 3.3.0 1354859 2012-06-29 3.3.1 1354859 2012-06-29 3.3.2 1354859 2012-06-30 3.3.0 1355272 2012-06-30 3.3.1 1355272 2012-06-30 3.3.2 1355272 Requiring both the current daily and latest weekly to be above the threshold makes sense to me, and as I said, it's what I previously believed was required. I just can't explain why it worked in this case, if that's required. Any ideas? Should I re-enable the latest weekly check in my script? On 06/30, [email protected] wrote: > On 06/30, [email protected] wrote: > > 20120629: Spam: 260720, Ham: 219330 > > Woo. > > > 20120623: Spam or ham is below threshold of 150,000: > > http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20120623 > > 20120623: Spam: 246602, Ham: 119126 > > Removed this threshold test for the last Saturday / net run, since it > doesn't appear to be relevant. > > -- > "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." > - Emiliano Zapata, Mexican Revolution Leader > http://www.ChaosReigns.com > -- "For every battle there is a price to pay. Now pick up your teeth and go home." - no fear http://www.ChaosReigns.com
