Re: sa-learn after autolearn=no

2004-11-01 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 07:36:35AM -0500, Dan Barker wrote: > 1) When I get a spam with autolearn=no in the headers, that means it's > already been learned. "no" means autolearning didn't occur, there is no way to know why it didn't do so unless you check the debug output. > 2) There is no need t

Re: sa-learn after autolearn=no

2004-11-01 Thread Matt Kettler
At 07:36 AM 11/1/2004 -0500, Dan Barker wrote: 1) When I get a spam with autolearn=no in the headers, that means it's already been learned. Not entirely true... It could mean it was already learned, but autolearn=no could also mean the score wasn't high enough. in 2.6x it could also mean t

sa-learn after autolearn=no

2004-11-01 Thread Dan Barker
Group, please comment on or correct these two statements. 1) When I get a spam with autolearn=no in the headers, that means it's already been learned. 2) There is no need to sa-learn --spam that message, it's already learned but simply didn't meet the threshold. Dan