From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/51261 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: How many people mark spam in gmane groups? Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 16:49:45 -0400 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <4n4r5aowwm.fsf@chubby.bwh.harvard.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1049748688 22980 80.91.224.249 (7 Apr 2003 20:51:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 20:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Mon Apr 07 22:51:26 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 192daP-0005yA-00 for ; Mon, 07 Apr 2003 22:51:25 +0200 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 192dZf-0006FV-00; Mon, 07 Apr 2003 15:50:39 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 07 Apr 2003 15:51:44 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (clifford.bwh.harvard.edu [134.174.9.41]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03442 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 15:51:27 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from chubby.bwh.harvard.edu (chubby [134.174.9.50]) by clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h37KnkI04866 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 16:49:47 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: (from tzz@localhost) by chubby.bwh.harvard.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.0) id h37Knk103384; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 16:49:46 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: ding@hpc.uh.edu X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6;d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Followup-To: ding@hpc.uh.edu In-Reply-To: (Reiner Steib's message of "Sun, 06 Apr 2003 01:16:15 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090018 (Oort Gnus v0.18) Emacs/21.3 (usg-unix-v) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:51261 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:51261 On Sun, 06 Apr 2003, 4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de wrote: > I don't use spam.el yet (but I'm sure I will in the future, because > it's certainly a very nice and necessary feature), so I don't know > how the `*gmane-report-*spam' would fit in there. As you say that > it's not trivial, it should be easier to put it in `gnus-sum.el'[1]. Well, the support for read-only backends is not done for spam.el, this is not a spam reporting issue as much as using spam.el with nntp for instance. The way it would work is very simple: - add a group parameter (global through a regex or specific for that group) for the spam-processor. The spam-processor takes whatever messages are marked as spam at summary exit and does something to them (for instance, train Bogofilter). - mark messages as spam in that group - exit the group - the spam-processor will be automatically invoked The first one would be done just once, of course. The problem is that nntp does not split articles like nnmail backends. So detecting new articles will be done differently, and instead of moving them to a spam group as spam.el does now, it would only mark them as spam. It would work similarly to adaptive scoring. As I said, it's a pretty big rewrite for spam.el. I read Usenet a lot, though, so it will bother me enough eventually that I'll implement it. I have to finish the registry and other new spam.el features first, though :) Ted