nnsplit

nnsplit

[ShengHuo ZHU]

To split incoming messages over multi-backend or split outgoing
messages, my idea is to create a virtual backend nnsplit, each group
of which contains a set of splitting rules.  Any new mail or article
going into the group is redirected to a real group.

Thoughts?

ShengHuo

Re: nnsplit

[Kai Großjohann]

On 31 Oct 2000, zsh@cs.rochester.edu wrote:
> 
> To split incoming messages over multi-backend or split outgoing
> messages, my idea is to create a virtual backend nnsplit, each group
> of which contains a set of splitting rules.  Any new mail or article
> going into the group is redirected to a real group.

A two-step approach like this has one disadvantage having to do with
duplication of information.  Suppose you want to store all mail from
Peter in nnml:peter, from Paul in nnml:paul, whereas Mary goes in
nnfolder:mary and Jane goes in nnfolder:jane.

Then your two-step approach requires the user to say `if from Peter or
Paul, then put in nnsplit:males, if from Mary or Jane, then put in
nnsplit:females'.  And then the nnsplit:males group matches against
Peter and Paul again.  Likewise for the nnsplit:females group.

If there was a single-step approach, this duplication wouldn't be
necessary.

Or am I misunderstanding your proposal?

For the two-step approach, I propose a variant: introduce a `keep'
operation in nnmail-split-methods, then let nnmail-split-methods be a
server parameter, and iterate over all servers.  You could also make
mail-sources be a server parameter (with this, it would be easy to put
all POP3 mail into nnml+pop3:inbox and all IMAP mail into
nnml+imap:inbox). 

kai
-- 
I like BOTH kinds of music.

Re: nnsplit

[ShengHuo ZHU]

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> On 31 Oct 2000, zsh@cs.rochester.edu wrote:
> > 
> > To split incoming messages over multi-backend or split outgoing
> > messages, my idea is to create a virtual backend nnsplit, each group
> > of which contains a set of splitting rules.  Any new mail or article
> > going into the group is redirected to a real group.
> 
> A two-step approach like this has one disadvantage having to do with
> duplication of information.  Suppose you want to store all mail from
> Peter in nnml:peter, from Paul in nnml:paul, whereas Mary goes in
> nnfolder:mary and Jane goes in nnfolder:jane.
> 
> Then your two-step approach requires the user to say `if from Peter or
> Paul, then put in nnsplit:males, if from Mary or Jane, then put in
> nnsplit:females'.  And then the nnsplit:males group matches against
> Peter and Paul again.  Likewise for the nnsplit:females group.
> 
> If there was a single-step approach, this duplication wouldn't be
> necessary.
> 
> Or am I misunderstanding your proposal?

You are right. This is an awkward idea.

ShengHuo