* should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus?
@ 2003-11-18 10:03 Ted Zlatanov
2004-01-02 21:43 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
2004-01-02 22:11 ` Thomas Hühn
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-11-18 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Ding Mailing List
gnus-registry.el sort of snuck up on me. I kept thinking it would
somehow be excluded from Oort Gnus' official release, but I realize
now that it's better to just add it to the manual because people are
using it and it's pretty stable.
I know this goes against the "no new features" status of Oort Gnus,
though. So I need to know: should gnus-registry.el be officially
added to the manual, or should it be officially ignored until No Gnus?
As to what features the registry provides:
- tracking of message followups by message ID references
- tracking of followups by subject and sender (optional)
- tracking of spam processor invocations
- (planned) tracking of spam scores
Note that there is no special code in the registry to deal with
spam-related tracking, it's all generic "extra data" storage
associated with a message ID. So the registry doesn't depend on
spam.el.
Thanks!
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus?
2003-11-18 10:03 should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus? Ted Zlatanov
@ 2004-01-02 21:43 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
2004-01-02 22:11 ` Thomas Hühn
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2004-01-02 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> I know this goes against the "no new features" status of Oort Gnus,
> though. So I need to know: should gnus-registry.el be officially
> added to the manual, or should it be officially ignored until No Gnus?
It probably makes sense to wait until No Gnus.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus?
2003-11-18 10:03 should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus? Ted Zlatanov
2004-01-02 21:43 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
@ 2004-01-02 22:11 ` Thomas Hühn
2004-01-05 18:51 ` Ted Zlatanov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Hühn @ 2004-01-02 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
Also sprach Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
> - tracking of spam processor invocations
I know this isn't really spam.el-specific, but does that mean that one
could force spam.el not to register a mail with bogofilter twice?
I'm still playing around with my spam.el-configuration.
Actually I'd like to have something like this:
- new mail arrives
- fancy splitting (with spam-split at the beginning)
- spam goes into "nnml:spam", everything else into it's folder
- ham in the spam group is un-registered and moved into a suitable
nnml-group
- spam in any "normal" group is registered and moved to spam where it
expires
At the moment I am almost there. I have my spam-group and several
unclassified, "normal" groups. I don't classify them as ham because I
think mails in that group might be re-registered over and over again,
thus poisoning the bogofilter database. Am I correct there? I'd like to
be able to set any mark (excluding spam-mark) on mails in these groups.
Since I'm a bit lazy, I leave the spam group and they get registered
with bogofilter. But I do not move the "good" mails to a ham group to
train bogofilter with them. And now I'm ended up with 14 MB spamlist and
2.5 MB goodlist.
Am I right about that re-registering of good mails when I classify all
of my normal mail groups as ham or have I understood something wrong?
And that's where your registry comes into play? With that one could
avoid this and classify almost everything as ham groups?
BTW, the spam.el-specific part of my .gnus begins thus:
(spam-initialize)
(setq spam-install-hooks t)
;(spam-install-hooks-function)
(setq spam-use-bogofilter t)
(setq spam-mark-ham-unread-before-move-from-spam-group t)
(require 'spam)
I think that the Info indicated that one should put in
spam-install-hooks (which resulted in an error) before you
commited your big doc patch.
So can I leave out everything except spam-initialize and
spam-use-bogofilter?
Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus?
2004-01-02 22:11 ` Thomas Hühn
@ 2004-01-05 18:51 ` Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2004-01-05 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Ding Mailing List
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004, ding@daphne.gnuu.de wrote:
> Also sprach Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
>
>> - tracking of spam processor invocations
>
> I know this isn't really spam.el-specific, but does that mean that
> one could force spam.el not to register a mail with bogofilter
> twice?
Yes, with registry tracking. If you limit the number of registry
entries, however, you will eventually lose that tracking information.
I could add a flag to the registry "preferentially keep messages with
tracking information" if this is a problem.
> I'm still playing around with my spam.el-configuration.
> Actually I'd like to have something like this:
>
- new mail arrives
- fancy splitting (with spam-split at the beginning)
- spam goes into "nnml:spam", everything else into it's folder
- ham in the spam group is un-registered and moved into a suitable
nnml-group
- spam in any "normal" group is registered and moved to spam where it
expires
I think your setup is almost exactly like mine, which is in the latest
Gnus manual. Check mine out and let me know if something is unclear.
> Am I right about that re-registering of good mails when I classify
> all of my normal mail groups as ham or have I understood something
> wrong?
You're right, you would re-register without the gnus-registry
tracking.
> And that's where your registry comes into play? With that one could
> avoid this and classify almost everything as ham groups?
Yes. I would advise, however, that you check registrations to make
sure things are working correctly. They should, but it does not hurt
to be cautious.
> BTW, the spam.el-specific part of my .gnus begins thus:
>
> (spam-initialize)
> (setq spam-install-hooks t)
> ;(spam-install-hooks-function)
> (setq spam-use-bogofilter t)
> (setq spam-mark-ham-unread-before-move-from-spam-group t)
> (require 'spam)
>
> I think that the Info indicated that one should put in
> spam-install-hooks (which resulted in an error) before you
> commited your big doc patch.
>
> So can I leave out everything except spam-initialize and
> spam-use-bogofilter?
This should be sufficient:
(setq spam-use-bogofilter t)
(setq spam-mark-ham-unread-before-move-from-spam-group t)
(spam-initialize)
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-01-05 18:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-11-18 10:03 should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus? Ted Zlatanov
2004-01-02 21:43 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
2004-01-02 22:11 ` Thomas Hühn
2004-01-05 18:51 ` Ted Zlatanov
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).