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:
> 
>> 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.
> 
> Why do you have two groups, nnml:spam and nnml:train?  Hm.  Ah,
> maybe it is in order to avoid training SA on all spam.  You look at
> nnml:spam first, then you catch all ham from there.  Only *real*
> spam is moved to nnml:train.  So you're not training SA with "fake
> spam".

Right.  Where I said "I can run SpamAssassin directly on the
'nnml:spam' group" I actually meant "nnml:train" and you knew what I
meant :)

> So it's a system similar to mine; I have nnimap:INBOX.spam instead
> of nnml:spam and nnimap:INBOX.makespam instead of nnml:train.  And I
> only train Bogofilter on the borderline cases, so I don't move all
> spam from nnimap:INBOX.spam to nnimap:INBOX.makespam.

Well, it takes time to move the articles, but then again I just have
to hit `q' and it's automatic so I don't mind doing it once a day.  I
also empty out my training group after I'm done training.

Ted