[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason) writes:
BTW we really need to go via bugzilla to discuss this. history
has shown that there are too many issues and patches to deal with
via the lists alone, and they *will* get lost that way.
Dean thinks the bugzilla license is onerous:
i have a bug to
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
Dean thinks the bugzilla license is onerous:
i have a bug to report, but i refuse to agree to the ASLv2 just to report
a bug. i suggest you guys stop being so anal.
I think that's not unreasonable. I modified bugzilla to say:
#
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2184
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3935
Summary: SA doesn't encode 8bit characters in it's own headers
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 2.64
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3924
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 04:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=2493)
-- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2493action=view)
perl script that crashes ActiveState perl 5.8.1 in
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3924
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 04:56 ---
An additional note about the crash script I uploaded: The initial allocation of
the array to have 386 elements and then using only 358 of them is just
sloppiness
First, sorry for breaking the nettiquete of the SA wiki, as I was not aware of the local way ofdiscussing page changes. Once again, I regret having been unpolite, it was not my intention.
Also regret to perhaps re-open old discussions and perhaps scares.
1.- Is there interest for a tool such as
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3935
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2231
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org
Casper Tone [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
First, sorry for breaking the nettiquete of the SA wiki, as I was not
aware of the local way of discussing page changes. Once again, I
regret having been unpolite, it was not my intention.
It's mostly that the Wiki is intended for factual information.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:25 ---
O ... M ... G ... !
Ok, so yeah uridnsbl_max_domains is ignored. Rather spectacularly actually.
my @longlist = keys %domlist;
my @shortlist = ();
for ($i
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=2494)
-- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2494action=view)
suggested patch
this is pretty trivial...
--- You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:42 ---
This might also cause our FP rate to go down slightly, in any case I'm glad it
was trivial!
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:45 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:42:49PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:45 ---
Will this avoid the crash in bug 3924 ?
If it reduces the number of sockets that are produced to less than the over 350
that the test case there generates, I
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 14:50 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 02:45:27PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will this
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:58:52PM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
I agree with Daniel that magic numbers make for hard-to-read code.
How's about defining a constant TIME_UNKNOWN_YET or similar, which
maps to -1, and using that instead?
Ok, I created AI_TIME_UNKNOWN and made it a generic constant.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 15:04 ---
Correction, 5 times, not 4 times, but only 1 for each URI with a numeric ip
address.
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC
I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way
around is to put in enough non-spam URIs such that the likelihood is
that your spam URI won't be listed.
I think a good work-around and improvement would be to change the
randomization function to favor certain URLs:
-
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-28 15:20 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
I think it's more likely to cause the FN rate to go up. A trivial way
21 matches
Mail list logo
