* Ham messages not being moved anymore
@ 2003-04-29 7:58 Niklas Morberg
2003-04-29 18:29 ` Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Niklas Morberg @ 2003-04-29 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
When I read ham messages in my spam group they will no
longer be moved out of the spam group when exiting.
It has worked before and I have made no changes to my
configuration.
Trying different settings for local ham-marks did not help.
Any ideas on what might be going on here? Is it working for
everybody else?
I'm using spam.el with spam-stat filtering and nnimap
backend. Gnus CVS from yesterday.
Niklas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Ham messages not being moved anymore
2003-04-29 7:58 Ham messages not being moved anymore Niklas Morberg
@ 2003-04-29 18:29 ` Ted Zlatanov
2003-04-30 8:53 ` Niklas Morberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-04-29 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, niklas.morberg@axis.com wrote:
> When I read ham messages in my spam group they will no
> longer be moved out of the spam group when exiting.
>
> It has worked before and I have made no changes to my
> configuration.
>
> Trying different settings for local ham-marks did not help.
It's definitely working here. Run
M-: (spam-ham-move-routine (gnus-parameter-ham-process-destination gnus-newsgroup-name))
while in the summary buffer. Put (debug) statements in
spam-ham-move-routine to see what's going wrong, if it does.
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Ham messages not being moved anymore
2003-04-29 18:29 ` Ted Zlatanov
@ 2003-04-30 8:53 ` Niklas Morberg
2003-04-30 15:46 ` Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Niklas Morberg @ 2003-04-30 8:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> It's definitely working here.
Thanks. Now I know more.
The first thing that got me was that messages are no longer
marked as read just by viewing them. This is good and just
something that I needed to learn.
The second thing was that I had configured the parameter
(ham-marks
(gnus-read-mark))
for my spam group. When removing this configuration, read
messages (explicitly marked as read by pressing `d' in the
summary buffer) were moved properly.
With this configuration, read messages are not moved. Am I
using the ham-marks parameter in the wrong way?
All parameters of my spam group included in case there is
something else that might be causing problems:
((uidvalidity . "53242")
(total-expire . t)
(spam-contents gnus-group-spam-classification-spam)
(spam-process
(gnus-group-spam-exit-processor-stat))
(ham-process-destination . "incoming")
(ham-marks
(gnus-read-mark))
(expiry-wait . 4)
(expiry-target . delete))
Niklas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Ham messages not being moved anymore
2003-04-30 8:53 ` Niklas Morberg
@ 2003-04-30 15:46 ` Ted Zlatanov
2003-05-06 13:18 ` [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix (was: Ham messages not being moved anymore) Niklas Morberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-04-30 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, niklas.morberg@axis.com wrote:
> The first thing that got me was that messages are no longer
> marked as read just by viewing them. This is good and just
> something that I needed to learn.
I'm not sure what you mean, messages should get the read-mark when
they are viewed. This is exactly what should happen, so they are
considered ham and moved out of the spam group.
> The second thing was that I had configured the parameter
>
> (ham-marks
> (gnus-read-mark))
>
> for my spam group. When removing this configuration, read
> messages (explicitly marked as read by pressing `d' in the
> summary buffer) were moved properly.
>
> With this configuration, read messages are not moved. Am I
> using the ham-marks parameter in the wrong way?
Not wrong, just not what you want. The default ham marks:
:variable-default '((".*" ((gnus-del-mark
gnus-read-mark
gnus-killed-mark
gnus-kill-file-mark
gnus-low-score-mark))))
should cover everyone (though I'm not sure about the kill-file and
low-score marks, I think they're better as ham marks than spam marks).
The mark definitions in gnus-sum.el say:
(defcustom gnus-del-mark ?r
"*Mark used for del'd articles."
:group 'gnus-summary-marks
:type 'character)
(defcustom gnus-read-mark ?R
"*Mark used for read articles."
:group 'gnus-summary-marks
:type 'character)
What you call "explicitly marking messages read" is considered a
delete operation internally in Gnus, thus the del-mark. I think the
word "delete" was avoided in user interactions so users don't get the
impression they are expiring the article or removing it through the
backend (B Del).
Thanks
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix (was: Ham messages not being moved anymore)
2003-04-30 15:46 ` Ted Zlatanov
@ 2003-05-06 13:18 ` Niklas Morberg
2003-05-08 13:35 ` [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Niklas Morberg @ 2003-05-06 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 936 bytes --]
Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, niklas.morberg@axis.com wrote:
>> The first thing that got me was that messages are no longer
>> marked as read just by viewing them. This is good and just
>> something that I needed to learn.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean, messages should get the read-mark when
> they are viewed. This is exactly what should happen, so they are
> considered ham and moved out of the spam group.
What I was trying to say was: pressing space in the Summary
buffer (what I usually do to ''read'' messages) will not
mark messages as read but will display the message for you.
Pressing `d' will set the read-mark for the message.
> What you call "explicitly marking messages read" is considered a
> delete operation internally in Gnus, thus the del-mark.
Ok, that explains a lot.
BTW, I think I found an error in the documentation for
spam-use-regex-headers, suggested patch included.
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: Fixed docstring references --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 656 bytes --]
cd c:/cygwin/usr/share/site-lisp/
diff -u -b "c:/cygwin/usr/share/site-lisp/spam.el~" "c:/cygwin/usr/share/site-lisp/spam.el"
--- c:/cygwin/usr/share/site-lisp/spam.el~ 2003-05-06 11:04:33.000000000 +0200
+++ c:/cygwin/usr/share/site-lisp/spam.el 2003-05-06 15:15:43.000000000 +0200
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@
(defcustom spam-use-regex-headers nil
"Whether a header regular expression match should be used by spam-split.
-Also see the variable `spam-spam-regex-headers' and `spam-ham-regex-headers'."
+Also see the variables `spam-regex-headers-spam' and `spam-regex-headers-ham'."
:type 'boolean
:group 'spam)
Diff finished at Tue May 06 15:15:56
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 8 bytes --]
Niklas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix
2003-05-06 13:18 ` [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix (was: Ham messages not being moved anymore) Niklas Morberg
@ 2003-05-08 13:35 ` Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-05-08 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Tue, 06 May 2003, niklas.morberg@axis.com wrote:
> BTW, I think I found an error in the documentation for
> spam-use-regex-headers, suggested patch included.
Thanks, comitted.
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-05-08 13:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-04-29 7:58 Ham messages not being moved anymore Niklas Morberg
2003-04-29 18:29 ` Ted Zlatanov
2003-04-30 8:53 ` Niklas Morberg
2003-04-30 15:46 ` Ted Zlatanov
2003-05-06 13:18 ` [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix (was: Ham messages not being moved anymore) Niklas Morberg
2003-05-08 13:35 ` [PATCH] spam.el docstring fix 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).