https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7115
--- Comment #17 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> --- (In reply to AXB from comment #16) > (In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #15) > > (In reply to Kevin A. McGrail from comment #13) > > > (In reply to Mark Martinec from comment #12) > > > > Couldn't resist factoring out common code from > > > > > > +1.00000000000 > > > > > > KAM > > > > (In reply to AXB from comment #14) > > > now we're getting all these new bayes bells & whistles, would't it be a > > > good > > > moment to get rid of the BAYES_999 and do the correct BAYES_100 ? > > > > Not a real high priority for me. bug 7013 had some discussion on this but I > > seem to remember there were barriers in code that we found when trending > > down this path before. > > from what I'm seeing all it needs is refactoring a cou'le of > eval:check_bayes rules in 23_bayes.cf and adapting the scores. I seem to remember finding hard coded Bayes items related to the BAYES_99 and BAYES_999 stuff. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
