On Thu, 09 Jan 2003, niklas.morberg@axis.com wrote:
> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> 
>> Right, but I need someone to actually request that -
>> it's at the bottom of the queue now, I'd rather write
>> docs and fix existing code right now. So, if anyone
>> wants spam-stat.el integration within spam.el sooner
>> instead of later, please let me know.
> 
> However, there is no need to prioritize this over the other
> things you are doing with spam.el at the moment. I saw that
> someone else was currently using spam-stat.el, so I'll just
> bug him instead of you for a while :)

Because this was something people wanted, I created a patch for
spam.el, spam-stat.el, and gnus.el to add spam-stat functionality.
It's pretty straightforward, but I need Alex to look at it and tell me
if I'm doing things correctly or badly.  

I especially don't want spam-stat.el to install its hooks into article
retrieval, since spam.el passes articles around to spam/ham processors
as strings.  Also, I added some things to spam-stat.el that are
necessary and/or nice such as the spam score threshhold.

Alex, can you look at the attached patch (it's against today's Gnus)
and see what you think?  I don't want to commit or test the patch
until I know it's sensible and OK with you.  Like I said, avoiding the
hook installation is especially important.

For spam.el, this adds nothing unusual - just the spam-stat ham and
spam processors, and the spam-use-stat variable for splitting incoming
mail.  You just customize variables as usual to add spam-stat support.

Ted