>> Secondly we never clarified if it was ok to discuss rules here in >> mass. I can't help it. Seeing all these rules has got me wanting to >> discuss them, and the posts regarding them will no doubt increase. So >> shall we continue to use SAtalk? I think we should. Maybe just put >> [RD] in the subject for rule discussion? > >I'm somewhat tentative about this too, we could easily end up flooding >the list with hundreds of rule discussion posts if we're not careful. >I'd really like to see an ok from the list admin or at least one of the >dev team before getting right into this.
Yep, go right ahead -- I like the subject-tagging idea, too. So rule discussions should use Subject lines prefixed with "[RD]". If the volume gets too much, we can investigate a new list etc.; but let's see how it goes first. Often splitting off to a new list doesn't work as well as you might think ;) BTW regarding the various rule suggestion sites. They seem like a good plan, but some suggestions: 1. categorise the rules, add descriptions, and tag with the names of who submitted them and (obfuscated) email addresses of that person, so that they can be contacted if we choose to pick 'em up. 2. use good names, and use a rule name prefix like "WIKI_" so those rules don't get confused with the default ruleset. 3. ensure the rules can be scraped easily by automated scripts, e.g. use a common format for the rule lines, and/or surround them with tags, and/or produce "export" pages that contains just the rules, without non-config text. 4. figure out some way to do QA! An easy way to do this is to script up something that runs nightly, extracting the rules into a config file (see point 3), running spamassassin --lint on that file to avoid syntax errors, then does a mass-check and hit-frequencies report on the good rules. 5. put up some simple guidelines -- e.g. "avoid single-word rules" etc. I think Matt K's "rule writing HOWTO" is the best set of suggestions here. We occasionally pick up rule suggestions and try them out; the easier it is to pick up those rules and test them, and the more QA done on them before the fact, the more likely this is to happen... PS: regarding spammer abuse, if the wiki is version controlled with RCS etc., it'd be easy enough to spot attempts to wipe it out and reinstate the previous version of that page. --j. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
