From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/54874 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: spam.el: automatically resplitting ham in a spam group? Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:33:12 -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: <4nptfnjhbb.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> References: <4nfzgkdqzx.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1069335275 18312 80.91.224.253 (20 Nov 2003 13:34:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:34:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M3414@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Nov 20 14:34:32 2003 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 1AMox6-0007W3-00 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:34:32 +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 1AMowz-0000QR-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:34:25 -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 1AMowv-0000QM-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:34:21 -0600 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (clifford.bwh.harvard.edu [134.174.9.41]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2C2B3A0026 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:34:20 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu (lockgroove [134.174.9.133]) by clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.11.0) with ESMTP id hAKDXg725535; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:33:43 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from tzz@localhost) by lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.0) id hAKDXCw08445; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:33:12 -0500 (EST) Original-To: lorentey@elte.hu (=?utf-8?q?L=C5=91rentey_K=C3=A1roly?=) 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: lorentey@elte.hu (=?utf-8?q?L=C5=91rentey_K=C3=A1roly?=), ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=28L=C5=91rentey_K=C3=A1roly's?= message of "Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:48:39 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (usg-unix-v) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:54874 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:54874 On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, lorentey@elte.hu wrote: > L=C5=91rentey K=C3=A1roly writes: >> Ted Zlatanov writes: >>> I could make a ham-destination option to use 'respool instead of a >>> group name, but just recently there was discussion of a nnimap bug >>> with respooling. What if the respooling returns nil, do we leave >>> the ham message in the spam group? >> >> Hm. What if spam-split would simply be disabled during the >> ham-exit respool? >=20 > Sorry, my mind was wandering about respooling back to the spam > group. When does respooling return nil? Does it mean that the > respooling failed to categorize the message in any group? I guess > in my case, leaving ham in the spam group is OK if it can not be > meaningfully resplit. Respooling could return nil if the last element is spam-split or some other function that can return nil. I think returning nil as the last split element is officially a Bad Thing, and spam-split does it because anywhere but the last element it indicates a fall-through (thus, ham gets through spam-split). Anyhow, the big concern, which I just formulated this morning because my brain works better then :) is that we resplit right back into the spam group. That's a very bad thing, because it will look to the user like spam.el is not doing its job. Ted