On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, John wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> > At 12:06 PM 12/23/2004, John wrote:
> > >Matt,
> > >I appreciate this info! Is there a place where I can go to find more about
> > >how this all works?
> >
> > Not that I'm aware of. There's some bits of infor
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 12:06 PM 12/23/2004, John wrote:
> >Matt,
> >I appreciate this info! Is there a place where I can go to find more about
> >how this all works?
>
> Not that I'm aware of. There's some bits of information in the wiki, but
> there's no "one general sou
At 12:06 PM 12/23/2004, John wrote:
Matt,
I appreciate this info! Is there a place where I can go to find more about
how this all works?
Not that I'm aware of. There's some bits of information in the wiki, but
there's no "one general source" of information...
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 10:56 AM 12/23/2004, John wrote:
> >This is surely better performance but I would
> >have thought that the new false negative total would be close to zero
> >since these rules were generated on the same spam corpus that I used to
> >test. I ran the t
At 10:56 AM 12/23/2004, John wrote:
This is surely better performance but I would
have thought that the new false negative total would be close to zero
since these rules were generated on the same spam corpus that I used to
test. I ran the tests with no remote tests and no bayes to as these new
sco
Greetings,
I did some googling and archive searching but didn't come up with a lot
and so I have a question on generating my own scores with
mass-check. I ran mass-check on a very small test corpus (437 spam, 99
ham) by untarring Mail-SpamAssassin-3.0.1.tar.gz doing the following:
1) cd to Mail-Sp
