Hi, I tend to agree with you but I'm not sure where to store that extra bit by default. We are talking about having users settings by default set not to scan. Adding an extra setting in MySQL or somewhere else for all users, plus users you may add on a daily basis, kinda defeats the purpose for not scanning by default.
Ideas are welcome. Regards, Rick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Korger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "SpamAssassin ML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2002 5:59 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin per user (MySQL) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 16 Nov 2002, Rick Macdougall wrote: > Quick look through the spamd code looks like this would be quite easy to > implement and it maintains the same standard of not processing Rules if the > value is 0. Not processing a rule assinged a score of 0 has exactly the effect you expect when setting the score to 0. The rule does not effect the final score. Whether it is processed or not is irrelevant. In contrast setting required_hits to 0 means (literally) requiring a mail to score 0.00 or above to be considered spam. This is a legitimate setting, i.e. considering any mail hitting any rule spam if no negative scores are assigned. (I'm not saying that is what a lot people might want.) I guess that's mostly theoretical but I think you shouldn't confuse people by interpreting setting in a way that's not logical. Further do I guess most people will have an additional bit per user to waste to store another boolean value run_SA. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: To learn the basics of securing your web site with SSL, click here to get a FREE TRIAL of a Thawte Server Certificate: http://www.gothawte.com/rd524.html _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
