I don't want to always be a whiner, so the fix is attached to this bug:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=229
If "all" is listed as part of "ok_locales", the CHARSET_FARAWAY tests
will short-circuit and are essentially ignored.
- Dan
Duncan Findlay writes:
>> On Debian, the
Michael Moncur wrote:
MM> First, three definite problems:
MM>
MM> >score PORN_8 -4.248
MM> I think this rule has become nearly useless ("mp3z" and "videoz" and "warez"
MM> are probably almost in common usage now) but it certainly isn't a non-spam
MM> indicator of this mag
On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Bart Schaefer wrote:
>
> BS> Right; the GPL doesn't require you to expose to any third party any
> BS> changes that you make; it just requires you to provide the source code if
> BS> and when you do expose changes to a third party.
>
> I'm not sure w
I notice someone just committed a change to the GAPPY_SUBJECT regex.
However, as the subject is now always included in body tests, any message
that matches GAPPY_SUBJECT will also match GAPPY_TEXT.
This might in part account for the negative score that GAPPY_TEXT got in
the latest GA run.
Shou
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Shouldn't all subject-specific tests be removed?
Of course I meant "all subject-specific tests that overlap with body
tests." But on closer inspection, I think GAPPY_SUBJECT may be the only
one left.
___
I moved my local configuration out of the way, so I know it's not that.
t/spamd_stopok 1/2 Not found: status = X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=5
t/spamd_stopFAILED test 2
Failed 1/2 tests, 50.00% okay
___
Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
BS>
BS> > Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> >
BS> > BS> Right; the GPL doesn't require you to expose to any third party any
BS> > BS> changes that you make; it just requires you to provide the source code if
BS> > BS> and when you do expo
Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> I notice someone just committed a change to the GAPPY_SUBJECT regex.
BS> However, as the subject is now always included in body tests, any message
BS> that matches GAPPY_SUBJECT will also match GAPPY_TEXT.
BS>
BS> This might in part account for the negative score that GAP
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bart Schaefer said:
>On a guess, I'd say that
> it all comes back to the GPL's use of "work" as a noun without defining
> it. "The work" of a program could be construed to include its algorithms.
IANAL, but `the work' in copyri
(I've already sent this to sa-sightings, back when it first arrived. I
was running some old false negatives through the released 2.20 to see if
it treated them differently.)
--- Begin Message ---
Title: newsletter.mockup
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Craig R. Hughes muttered drunkenly:
> Bart Schaefer wrote:
>
> BS> On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> BS>
> BS> > Bart Schaefer wrote:
> BS> >
> BS> > BS> Right; the GPL doesn't require you to expose to any third party any
> BS> > BS> changes that you make; it just
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Bart Schaefer wrote:
>
> But some config files are more programmatic than others. Is
> EvalTests.pm code, or config file?
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter whether it's code or config
file unless you're copying and distributing the whole
On Saturday 20 April 2002 11:10 am, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Shouldn't all subject-specific tests be removed?
I think what should be done is to add a rule that gets triggered if there's
only gappy text in the body. If bug #47
(http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47) were implemente
Nix wrote:
N> Ask [EMAIL PROTECTED] :)
I'd rather just see if the original author is willing to grant us a BSD-style or
Artisitic license, than enter into a philosophical/legal/ethical debate with the
FSF.
N> Bear in mind that you can license different bits of a program
N> differently; for inst
Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
BS>
BS> > Bart Schaefer wrote:
BS> >
BS> > But some config files are more programmatic than others. Is
BS> > EvalTests.pm code, or config file?
BS>
BS> You're missing the point. It doesn't matter whether it's code or config
BS>
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Craig R. Hughes muttered drunkenly:
> Nix wrote:
> N> Bear in mind that you can license different bits of a program
> N> differently; for instance, you could license the EvalTests.pm under a
> N> dual license permitting free modification and redistribution, or
> N> mod/redist
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Bart Schaefer wrote:
>
> BS> The GPL cuts both ways: If I take my local.cf file and declare it to
> BS> be GPL'd, then I'm not allowed to add it to SA and distribute the
> BS> whole thing as a new "work", because SA is not GPL'd and I do not
> BS> own
Bart Schaefer writes:
> That doesn't matter. The *GPL* says that I can't include my GPL'd code in
> any other work that is not GPL'd. Even if SA's license says it's OK, I'm
> contradicting my own license if I do so.
You don't need license code you own to yourself. If you own the code,
you can
Craig R Hughes writes:
> So we cannot include the languages analysis library as a plugin to
> SA without placing under the GPL. This sounds like you agree with
> the basic problem I think I have with such an inclusion.
I think it could be "solved" by distributing it separately (quite easy
since
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I just upgraded to 2.20. I have in my local.cf
report_header 1
use_terse_report 1
But I don't think they're working...
This is the header of the sample spam included with
Mail-SpamAssassin-2.20:
Return-Path:
Received: (from root@localhost)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nevermind...I its working they way its supposed to! :) Its been a
long day!
Mike Loiterman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Key 0xD1B9D18E
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:spamassassin-talk- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
> Of
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Bart Schaefer writes:
>
> > That doesn't matter. The *GPL* says that I can't include my GPL'd
> > code in any other work that is not GPL'd. Even if SA's license says
> > it's OK, I'm contradicting my own license if I do so.
>
> You don't need licen
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:13:08AM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
>
> Any sufficiently advanced GA is indistinguishable from magic.
The problem with the GA is that it has everything to do with the spam
corpus it runs on and nothing to do with any other spam. It solves the
problem posed to it too
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> Craig R Hughes writes:
DQ>
DQ> > So we cannot include the languages analysis library as a plugin to
DQ> > SA without placing under the GPL. This sounds like you agree with
DQ> > the basic problem I think I have with such an inclusion.
DQ>
DQ> I think it could be "solved
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 05:23:29PM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> (Note that SA *could* be distributed under *two* licenses, both the GPL
> and the Artistic, with a compile-time option to neither use nor install
> the language library if the licensee does not agree to be bound by the
> GPL.)
SA *i
As I understand it from reading bug # 227, the 'triplets.txt' file should be
in the rules directory? After running 'make install' on a couple of
different CVS versions, the file hasn't been copied to
/usr/local/share/spamassassin/ with the rules files - the only copy of
triplets.txt I have is in t
Ben Jackson wrote:
BJ> The problem with the GA is that it has everything to do with the spam
BJ> corpus it runs on and nothing to do with any other spam. It solves the
BJ> problem posed to it too literally for our needs. The intelligibility
BJ> of the results is poor, which makes it hard to det
27 matches
Mail list logo
