bogus bogotuning

[Jason A. Smith]

Work has kept me busy lately, but I finally got around to making a patch
for the force option in bogotune.  The patch is attached, hopefully it
addresses all of the concerns from the developers in the warnings and
documentation.  Any comments or suggestions?

~Jason


On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 07:00, Greg Louis wrote:
> On 20040129 (Thu) at 1851:31 -0500, David Relson wrote:
> 
> > After reading Clint's comment, it appears that there are others who want
> > the opportunity to see what happens with a small message set.  I'll
> > consider adding the new option to bogofilter if someone will supply a
> > patch and if the patch includes the before _and_ after warnings agreed
> > on my Greg and Clint.
> > 
> > Jason - I believe the ball is in your court now.
> 
> In fairness to Jason, I think we need to provide the text, because
> Clint and I discussed it off the list, cc you.  Here it is (to be
> printed both before and after the regular output):
> 
> >  *** WARNING ***  The original authors of bogotune strongly advise
> >  against the use of the -f option, which was implemented without their
> >  approval.  The option bypasses bogotune's protective checks and allows
> >  bogotune to run without enough messages to ensure valid results.  This
> >  will often result in bogotune suggesting wrong parameter values that,
> >  if used, may significantly degrade bogofilter's accuracy.
> 
> If you decide to call it -F, as before, then s/-f/-F/ above, obviously.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bogotune-force.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 6474 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <http://www.bogofilter.org/pipermail/bogofilter/attachments/20040209/1faa11f4/attachment.bin>