From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/56211 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: problem with bbdb whitelist filtering Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:55:12 -0500 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: <4n65exjhen.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> References: <200401120935.i0C9ZbVV024046@loki.exolution.lan> <4nllocri65.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> <200401130845.i0D8jChq029589@loki.exolution.lan> <4nu12qi348.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> <200401220953.i0M9rFDm020430@loki.exolution.lan> <4noesvua0n.fsf@collins.bwh.harvard.edu> <200401231507.i0NF73FJ029804@loki.exolution.lan> <87hdyhpu68.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1075233494 9470 80.91.224.253 (27 Jan 2004 19:58:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 19:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M4751@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Jan 27 20:58:09 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AlZLc-0002Ow-00 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:58:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1AlZKQ-0000RO-00; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:56:54 -0600 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1AlZKE-0000Qr-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:56:42 -0600 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (clifford.bwh.harvard.edu [134.174.9.41]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AF7E3A004A for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:56:41 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from collins.bwh.harvard.edu (collins [134.174.9.80]) by clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id i0RJtLU10295; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:55:21 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from collins.bwh.harvard.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by collins.bwh.harvard.edu (8.12.9+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id i0RJtCvl002416; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:55:12 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from tzz@localhost) by collins.bwh.harvard.edu (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id i0RJtCbF002413; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 14:55:12 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Kai Grossjohann 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: Kai Grossjohann , ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <87hdyhpu68.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> (Kai Grossjohann's message of "Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:22:55 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (usg-unix-v) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:56211 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:56211 On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, kai@emptydomain.de wrote: > Write two functions, mm-spam-split-work and mm-spam-split-home, like > so: > > (defun mm-spam-split-work () > (let ((spam-split-group "work-spam")) > (spam-split))) > > (defun mm-spam-split-home () > (let ((spam-split-group "home-spam")) > (spam-split))) > > Now you can add a fancy split rule that checks something: > > (| ...some rules here... > (to "workaddress" (| (: mm-spam-split-work) > ...other.rules.for.work.mail...)) > (to "homeaddress" (| (: mm-spam-split-home) > ...other rules for home mail...))) > > Do you see the logic? It might be less intrusive than Ted's > suggestion. But it might make your rule logic complicated, I'm not > sure -- I haven't thought deeply about your rules as you showed > them. Cool suggestion, just one note - spam-split can take a string argument. If given, that sets spam-split-group to avoid exactly what you have above. So Martin could do, using your example: (| ...some rules here... (to "workaddress" (| (: spam-split "work-spam") ...other.rules.for.work.mail...)) (to "homeaddress" (| (: spam-split "home-spam") ...other rules for home mail...))) I like your way to solve Martin's split issues better than mine, btw :) Ted