...
- DanielQuinlan suggested: The second, a collection that do not qualify for rules/core. For example, SpamAssassin intentionally doesn't filter virus bounces (yet, at least), but there is a good virus bounce ruleset out there.
- BobMenschel: Similarly, an "extra" rules set might include rules that positively identify spam from spamware, but hit <0.25% of spam. Or an "aggressive" rules set might include rules that hit with an S/O of only 0.89, but push a lot of spam over the 5.0 threshold without impacting significantly on ham.
- ChrisSanterre: Seeing this breakdown of dirs, gave me an idea. Why not set the "aggresiveness" of SA for updates? Like how SARE has ruleset0.cf (no ham hits), ruleset1.cf (few ham, high S/O), etc., with each "level" of rule set file getting slightly more aggressive, risking (though not necessarily seeing) slightly higher FP rates. Users could set some config like supdate=(1-4), with 1 being the most conservative, and 4 being the most aggresive (with the knowledge that more aggresive *could* possibly cause more FPs).
We can also vote for extraordinary stuff that doesn't fit into those criteria...
...