On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:49:56PM +0000, Justin Mason wrote: > *We* may not have full rules in the core ruleset, but I'm pretty sure SARE > and other third parties have a few. SpamAssassin isn't just a bundled set > of rules -- it's a platform, too ;) Changing the platform -- in > a backwards incompatible way -- is a bad thing to do imo.
I would generally agree, except for this type of situation. I have no evidence for this, but if full rules are helping cause problems such as high memory use and large scan times (and it's certainly possible because we all know how inefficient full rules are and have been -- that's why we stopped using them in the first place), then shouldn't we try to help by disabling the problematic rules by default? If the user understands the risks and decides to use full rules anyway, they could easily enable them. On the flip side, if people are downloading rules from third parties, they'll already be making a conscious decision to use those full rules, so maybe this doesn't actually help. <shrug> If people generally don't think it's a good idea, that's fine with me. It was just a thought. :) -- Randomly Generated Tagline: nappster.com: Download any celebrity from A.A. Milne to Z.Z. Top
pgpCSNMNs7SIY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
