Re: spam/ham exit processors

[Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>]

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003, kai@emptydomain.de wrote:

> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> 
>> On Mon, 03 Nov 2003, colman@ppllc.com wrote:
>>
>>>>From my reading of the manual, it seems that the suggested or
>>>>anticipated
>>> modus operandi is to move spam in a ham-classified group to a
>>> spam-classified group for furthur processing and to move ham from
>>> a spam-classified group over to a ham-classified group for furthur
>>> processing.
>>
>> Nope, you can process the spam at the point of origin or in a
>> central group.  Most people like a central "spam" group better.
> 
> Oh!  Does this mean that people could set
> gnus-spam-process-destinations to nnml:spam, say, then set the
> spam-process parameter just on nnml:spam, for it to be added to the
> blacklist or whatever?  (Whereas spam-process remains unset/nil in
> all other groups except nnml:spam?)
> 
> Fascinating.

Sure, you could have spam moved from all groups to "nnml:spam" [1] and
then process spam only in "nnml:spam".  I do that, and furthermore I
have the spam-process-destination parameter of "nnml:spam" set to
"nnml:train" so I can run SpamAssassin directly on the "nnml:spam"
group's file contents.  In "nnml:spam" I have the
ham-process-destination set to "nnml:mail" and thus when I tick an
article in the spam group it gets popped and ham-processed back into
"nnml:mail".  It's a pretty tidy system.

Ted

[1] "nnimap+mail.lifelogs.com:spam" actually, but the prefix is not
important