Martin Hepworth wrote:
Another reason
[snip]
I shall be sticking to 2.64 for the forsee-able future as 3.02 gives me
no advantage and quite a high likelihood of more spam dropping through
the system!
Not specific to Martins reply, but thanks to all the responses regarding
continued use
:42 AM
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: maintaining the 2.6 branch
Another reason
I've been doing some testing ove the last couple of days with 3.02 and
found it's scores are way lower on all test emails than 2.64. (anywhere
upto 33% lower in limited tests).
I've managed to get
.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Hepworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:
Monday, January 10, 2005 3:42 AM
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: maintaining the 2.6 branch
Another reason
I've been doing some testing ove the last couple of days with 3.02 and
found it's scores
the 2.6 branch
Another reason
I've been doing some testing ove the last couple of days with 3.02 and
found it's scores are way lower on all test emails than 2.64. (anywhere
upto 33% lower in limited tests).
I've managed to get most of my 2.64 rules etc over (along with bayes),
but I'm
At 06:42 AM 1/10/2005, Martin Hepworth wrote:
I've been doing some testing ove the last couple of days with 3.02 and
found it's scores are way lower on all test emails than 2.64. (anywhere
upto 33% lower in limited tests).
I've managed to get most of my 2.64 rules etc over (along with bayes),
Another reason
I've been doing some testing ove the last couple of days with 3.02 and
found it's scores are way lower on all test emails than 2.64. (anywhere
upto 33% lower in limited tests).
I've managed to get most of my 2.64 rules etc over (along with bayes),
but I'm nervous about
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob Proulx said:
Running Debian stable is not a good reason to avoid upgrading
spamassassin to the best available version.
Thus my conditional, as long as it's working well. 2.64 is working for
me, and VERY well: ~99% spam hits. I see no reason to upgrade unless
Whoops, forgot to cc the list. Sorry for the dupe, Per.
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 09:54:32 +0100, Per Jessen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
Show of hands,
who's still on 2.64 with no exact plans to upgrade?
Alright, so far I've seen 4-5, maybe 6 people
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
who's still on 2.64 with no exact plans to upgrade?
Me too. I'm a Debian user, so I'm sticking with 2.64 as long as it's
working well. Unless 3.X goes into Sarge, which I suspect is unlikely.
I am also a Debian user, running Debian woody
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 21:33:34 -0700, Bob Proulx [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
who's still on 2.64 with no exact plans to upgrade?
Me too. I'm a Debian user, so I'm sticking with 2.64 as long as it's
working well. Unless 3.X goes into Sarge,
Ron Johnson wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
Show of hands,
who's still on 2.64 with no exact plans to upgrade?
Alright, so far I've seen 4-5, maybe 6 people saying they intend to stick to
2.64 for the foreseeable future. Is that really all?
I'm quite willing myself to put an effort in in
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 00:54, Per Jessen wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
Show of hands,
who's still on 2.64 with no exact plans to upgrade?
Alright, so far I've seen 4-5, maybe 6 people saying they intend to stick to
2.64 for the foreseeable future. Is that really all?
) 379-0001 Office
(516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies
(516) 908-4185 Fax
http://www.meitech.com/
-Original Message-
From: Martin Hepworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 11:09 AM
Cc: SpamAssassin list
Subject: Re: maintaining the 2.6 branch
and me..no had time
that
time must occur infrequently.
Ragnar Paulson
The Software Group Limited
- Original Message -
From: Per Jessen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 3:54 AM
Subject: maintaining the 2.6 branch (was: [2.64] FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK buggy)
Ron
Cc: SpamAssassin list
Subject: Re: maintaining the 2.6 branch
and me..no had time to upgrade thus far and 2.64 does a very nice job..
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 00:54, Per
Although we have upgraded on most of our systems I am not too enthused with
the idea of touching our main gateway. It works, so I don't want to break
it.
Michele
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd
Hosting, co-location domains
http://www.blacknight.ie/
Tel. +353 59 9137101
16 matches
Mail list logo
