bogus bogotuning

[Greg Louis]

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.

-- 
| G r e g  L o u i s         | gpg public key: 0x400B1AA86D9E3E64 |
|  http://www.bgl.nu/~glouis |   (on my website or any keyserver) |
|  http://wecanstopspam.org in signatures helps fight junk email. |