[Development] [SPAM] How bad QList really is

[André Pönitz]

Spam detection software, running on the system "mx.qt-project.org",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.

Content preview:  We all know the story that began with "We knew for a long
  time that QList is not a good default container, despite what the documentation
   claims. The problem boils down to the fact that for a lot of types T, QList<T>
   is needlessly ineffi [...] 

Content analysis details:   (5.3 points, 4.6 required)

 pts rule name              description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 0.8 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
                            [score: 0.5000]
 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
                            provider (apoenitz[at]t-online.de)
 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE          SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2      RBL: Average reputation (+2)
                            [194.25.134.80 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
                            blocked.  See
                            http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                             for more information.
                            [URIs: marcmutz.wordpress.com]
 2.0 SPOOFED_FREEMAIL       No description available.
 2.5 TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT       To: lacks brackets + percentage


-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_P=F6nitz?= <apoenitz at t-online.de>
Subject: How bad QList really is
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 16:49:46 +0200
Size: 5349
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20200425/8b0cca64/attachment.mht>