--As of February 20, 2014 9:23:56 AM -0800, John Hardin is alleged to have
said:
BAYES_99 is being reverted to its original definition and BAYES_999 is
being converted to an overlapping additive rule that adds some more
points to BAYES_99 for the very top end of Bayes score.
If you have locally set a high score for BAYES_999 you may want to reduce
or remove that override. (Then again, BAYES_99 + BAYES_999 scoring 10+
isn't really *that* much of a problem unless your Bayes database is off
the rails... :) )
This should go out within the next couple of rule updates.
--As for the rest, it is mine.
Just as a note: This discussion went quite a bit further than this mailing
list, since the rule leak affected anyone using a recent version of
Spamassassin. I know for certain it reached NANOG, for example. Given
that there are likely people who've rescored the BAYES_999 rule and will
not see this decision, would it be possible to release it as a *different*
rule? (And retire BAYES_999 entirely.) Name it BAYES_99_9 or something, so
that previous quick-fixes don't affect people negatively? A surprise
change to over-score messages quickly following a surprise change to
under-score messages just hits me wrong. I'd be nice if we could avoid
causing more problems.
Daniel T. Staal
---------------------------------------------------------------
This email copyright the author. Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes. This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---------------------------------------------------------------
