spam score for each test in header

[Gerry Doris]

On Thu, 15 May 2003, Julian Field wrote:

> 3 patches attached.
>
> At 19:19 15/05/2003, you wrote:
> >That looks great! :)
> >
> >Would it be possible for you to post a patch that implements just the
> >following?  We aren't ready to upgrade to the latest version of MS until
> >we can fully test it (using Sophos SAVI, etc).  But the change below
> >would easily be testable and implementable in the short run :-)
> >
> >Scott
> >
> >--On Thursday, May 15, 2003 5:18 PM +0100 Julian Field
> ><mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK> wrote:
> >
> >>Very good idea. No sooner said than done :-)
> >>
> >>X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: spam, SpamAssassin (score=7.8, required 5,
> >>          DATE_IN_PAST_12_24 0.21, DRASTIC_REDUCED 1.54, HOME_EMPLOYMENT
> >>1.50,          INVALID_DATE 0.57, INVALID_MSGID 0.38, NO_REAL_NAME 0.73,
> >>          ONCE_IN_LIFETIME 0.74, REMOVE_SUBJ 0.81, UNDISC_RECIPS 1.44)
> >>
> >>Does that look okay to you?
> >>I would like to keep the original sort order (alphabetical) to make the
> >>code simpler.

I just tried out the new spam score display and it works great!  I had no
idea that Bayes was adding so much to the total score.  Thanks again
Julian!

--
Gerry

"The lyfe so short, the craft so long to learne"  Chaucer