From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/60996 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Ted Zlatanov" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: spam.el/spam-report.el: Gmane spam reporting broken in No Gnus Date: 21 Sep 2005 10:45:33 -0400 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <4nirwuiinm.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <4nek7jk83j.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1127314039 588 80.91.229.2 (21 Sep 2005 14:47:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 14:47:19 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+m9528@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Sep 21 16:47:17 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EI5rR-00016X-K9 for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:46:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1EI5rN-00073f-00; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:46:09 -0500 Original-Received: from nas02.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.40]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1EI5qw-00073a-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:45:42 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by nas02.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1EI5qs-0005Cu-3q for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:45:42 -0500 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu ([134.174.9.41] helo=mail.bwh.harvard.edu) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1EI5qq-00066B-00 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:45:36 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 1944 invoked from network); 21 Sep 2005 14:40:50 -0000 Envelope-Sender: tzz@lifelogs.com Envelope-Recipients: ding@gnus.org, Original-Received: from asimov.bwh.harvard.edu (HELO asimov) (internal?.8?user:?tzz@[134.174.8.118]) (envelope-sender ) by mail.bwh.harvard.edu (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 21 Sep 2005 14:40:49 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-To: ding@gnus.org 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" X-Hashcash: 1:20:050921:ding@gnus.org::MIIzzcYqBe+uf2Lk:00001TSe In-Reply-To: (Reiner Steib's message of "Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:19:38 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on sysblade0.bwh.harvard.edu X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.8 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.1 X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:60996 Archived-At: On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc wrote: On Tue, Sep 20 2005, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Thu, 08 Sep 2005, reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc wrote: > [...] >> Can you try to use (spam spam-use-gmane) instead of >> gnus-group-spam-exit-processor-report-gmane? > > Then it works: Great. I'm debating whether I should complete remove the old-style gnus-group-*-exit-processor-* variables. I say yes. If I do that, I won't have to fix this bug :) > I'm a little confused about the obsolescence: In [v5-10]/lisp/spam.el > `spam-list-of-processors' does not seem to be obsolete (CMIIW, > please). Well, the variable's docstring has as the first line: "The OBSOLETE `spam-list-of-processors' list. Should I mark it obsolete in some other way? I recall Emacs Lisp has some properties for that... > While at it: In the v5-10 branch, there's the following comment: > > ,----[ [v5-10]/lisp/spam.el ] > | ;; note that spam-use-gmane is not a legitimate check > | (spam-use-gmane nil > | spam-report-gmane-register-routine > | ;; does Gmane support unregistration? > | nil > | nil) > `---- > > Gmane supports unregistration: You can reverse the report > http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.foo.bar:1234 with > http://unspam.gmane.org/gmane.foo.bar:1234 Thanks, I didn't know that. I just added the support to spam.el and spam-report.el. I assume that registering as spam is the same as unregistering as ham, and vice versa; if that's not the case let me know and I'll correct the backend registration. Please test the reporting, if you have a chance. Thanks Ted