https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6123
--- Comment #2 from Karsten Bräckelmann <[email protected]> 2009-06-04 02:08:40 PST --- While this probably can be useful in some cases, it makes it really easy for the user to shoot his own foot. The problem is with carefully evaluating how many hits can be considered ok-ish, and where to raise the score beyond all thresholds -- and to craft scores matching that. If this would be implemented, I guess I'd prefer something like the procmail weighted scoring technique, which would cover this -- as well as the currently existing ones as special cases x=0 (plain rule) and x=1 (tflags multiple). More of a gut feeling, though, didn't think it through properly yet. ;) As for the name, tflags multiply is a no-go IMHO. This needs some better distinction from multiple than a single char change. Matt, can you point us at a previous discussion? On list, or bugzilla? Anyway, regarding the challenge to come up with an example, the following flexible and easy to grok rules' stub is about what you need to beat. Doesn't it pretty much do what you intend? tflags __FOO multiple meta FOO ( __FOO ) score FOO 0.2 meta FOO_4 ( __FOO >= 4 ) score FOO_4 1.0 meta FOO_8 ( __FOO >= 8 ) score FOO_8 2.5 -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
