On 11/5/2014 2:12 PM, John Woods wrote:
I did skim bug 5503 earlier, but didn't understand it at first.
Knowing the history now, it makes a little more sense, although I'm
still fuzzy on why the value of "3" for the body and head points is
important.
Can disagree. I don't know the history
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, John Woods wrote:
As for Bayes strategies (and without starting a flamewar), we just
started implementing an IMAP folder in everyone's mailbox called "Learn As
Spam", that gets processed through "sa-learn --spam". It sounds like we may
need to leave auto-learning to SA's
Kevin,
I did skim bug 5503 earlier, but didn't understand it at first.
Knowing the history now, it makes a little more sense, although I'm
still fuzzy on why the value of "3" for the body and head points is
important.
It might be nice to have local.cf directives to allow admins to be
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 17:06:54 -0600
John Woods wrote:
> 1) How does SpamAssassin derive and sum the "body_only" and
> "head_only" points? It doesn't look like the body_only points
> correspond to any scores from individual tests.
Scoring uses one of four score sets, chosen according to whet
On 11/4/2014 6:06 PM, John Woods wrote:
Everyone,
We're having problems with auto learning on v3.4.0 that we aren't
having on v.3.3.2. The number of spam e-mails being auto-learned has
dropped significantly, and the amount of spam being let through (false
negatives) is higher as well.
Everyone,
We're having problems with auto learning on v3.4.0 that we aren't
having on v.3.3.2. The number of spam e-mails being auto-learned has
dropped significantly, and the amount of spam being let through (false
negatives) is higher as well.
For reference, here is a snippet from
