[spambayes-dev] 1.0 Build Testing (please!)

Tony Meyer tameyer at ihug.co.nz
Wed Sep 29 06:27:56 CEST 2004


> Well, the option is there and people are using it so I 
> thought we should at least make it work correctly. <wink>  I 
> never cared for it, either, because it plays havoc with the 
> ability to reply to the message if it was in fact legitimate, 
> and I would have no reservations about simplifying the 
> configuration and eliminating this option.

There is no good solution here, because OE is so limited.  IIRC, you can
filter on From:, To:, Subject: and the body, so we have to use one of those
or the notation is useless.  To: and From: are arguably less intrusive than
Subject:, so I like that we offer two options.  I doubt many people notate
ham, so as long as there are no false positives (a reasonable assumption),
and few unsure hams (likely for many people I think), then changing the To:
doesn't hurt.

I wouldn't have a problem with changing it so that it matched whatever the
RFC says (maybe classification at spambayes or something like that which is an
invalid address, but valid formatting?).

=Tony Meyer



More information about the spambayes-dev mailing list