Hello nadim, Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 3:15:09 AM, you wrote:
n> Hi, I noticed that some some tests are not assigned any score. n> A mail that already qualified for **SPAM** had a HOT_NASTY score of 0! The default score (the score given to a rule hit if nothing is specified) is 1.0 -- if your HOT_NASTY gets a score of 0, it's because that's the score set for the rule (actually it's likely 0.somethingsmall, since an actual 0 wouldn't test, wouldn't match, wouldn't score). n> Is there any tool to handle all those nifty filters? Not sure what you mean by "all those nifty filters." From my perspective SA is one filter. n> SA is a great tool and it almost make me miss the spam ;-) but the n> configuration of the built-in filters, the add-in filter and the user_pref n> filters added to the updating chore is a bit messy. I will not just complain, n> I'll do the job if the problem is felt by more than me and you give me enough n> input. If by "built-in" filters you mean the distribution rule set, don't worry about them. They come with, stay with, and leave with SpamAssassin. If by "add-in" filters you mean things like SARE rules, wiki.us rules, and other rules files, no there's no simple tool, since there's no way of predicting which files you'll want to use from what sources, including sources that don't yet exist. A lot of people find using RDJ useful; I don't bother with it. user_prefs is rarely used as a "filter", but rather as fine-tuning, a method of making a few modifications to rule scores, and maybe adding a few blacklists and whitelists. As the name implies, it's user-based, and therefore user-managed. Bob Menschel
