From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/49839 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: spam-check-BBDB bug?/bbdb whitelist split function Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 12:51:45 -0500 Organization: =?koi8-r?q?=F4=C5=CF=C4=CF=D2=20=FA=CC=C1=D4=C1=CE=CF=D7?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <4nr8amfwem.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> References: <4nwukeiy3c.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1044467995 31521 80.91.224.249 (5 Feb 2003 17:59:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 17:59:55 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18gThK-0007FG-00 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2003 18:50:59 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18gTie-0002ly-00; Wed, 05 Feb 2003 11:52:20 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 05 Feb 2003 11:53:17 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (sclp3.sclp.com [66.230.238.2]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA17235 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 11:53:04 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 78086 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2003 17:52:02 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 78075 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2003 17:52:02 -0000 Original-Received: from clifford.bwh.harvard.edu (134.174.9.41) by 66.230.238.6 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2003 17:52:02 -0000 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 h15Hpvj29547 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 12:51:57 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from tzz@localhost) by lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.0) id h15Hpj502572; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 12:51:45 -0500 (EST) 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" Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: (Niklas Morberg's message of "Wed, 05 Feb 2003 16:07:56 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090015 (Oort Gnus v0.15) Emacs/21.2 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49839 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49839 On Wed, 05 Feb 2003, niklas.morberg@axis.com wrote: > Ted Zlatanov writes: > >> Currently, spam-split will fall through to the next >> spam/ham check on a whitelist match. >> >> I thought of having whitelists return t for a positive ham >> match, and then spam-split wouldn't examine the rest of the >> spam/ham checks but simply return nil altogether. Does that >> makes sense? > > Given that I understand you correctly: yes! I get some false > positives on mail from people who are in my BBDB when I use > spam-stat.el. If what you are writing means: turn on BBDB > whitelisting and all mail from everybody in your BBDB will > be considered ham, then I am all for it. Well, here's the embarassing thing: this was how things were supposed to work when Francois Pinard wrote the code, but I didn't pay attention and made whitelist/BBDB checks fall through to the next spam-split rule (they returned nil instead of t). So it's all my fault. > False positives are really really bad because it means I have to > sift through my spam group looking for valid emails. But you knew > this already. I think the new code will fix that, try it (just committed to CVS). I also added spam-use-{whitelist,BBDB}-exclusive for those who want to consider all mail from people NOT in the BBDB/whitelist spam. Ted