Re: I think I might have mistreated spam.el...

[Andreas Fuchs <asf@void.at>]

On 2003-01-27, Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote:
> Splitting functions will return a short group name, and the backend
> will convert that to the fully qualified group name.  Thus,
> spam-split-group should be just "spambox" or whatever you like, and
> that will translate into "nnml+private:spambox" automatically.
> 
> This is a Gnus convention (nnmail-split-fancy and nnimap-split-fancy),
> not something spam.el controls AFAIK.

Ah, I understand. Thanks for explaining that.

>> After that is resolved, my only problem is how to get the articles
>> from nnml+private:nnml+private:spambox into nnml+private:spambox. mv
>> should do it (plus faking the right .active article cound, plus
>> rebuilding nov), right?
> 
> I would enter the group, select all the articles, and move them.
> Should be very quick with nnml.

That's the problem: I can't enter the bogus group. Telling gnus to enter
it makes gnus enter the "normal" nnml+private:spambox.

Hm, I'll try mv for now (-:

Thanks,
-- 
Andreas Fuchs, <asf@acm.org>, asf@jabber.at, antifuchs