From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/70774 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: That newfangled IMAP thing... Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 05:54:21 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <874odtewwy.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87hbi3jasy.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87pqwmsusz.fsf@news.realpath.org> <8762yd6j4j.fsf@rimspace.net> <87eid0fsil.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87bp84y00w.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <874odv4ar3.fsf@rimspace.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1284375315 19174 80.91.229.12 (13 Sep 2010 10:55:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 10:55:15 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M19147@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Sep 13 12:55:14 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ov6gr-0000lX-6d for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:55:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ov6gp-0003bM-46; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 05:55:11 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ov6gn-0003az-Ix for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 05:55:09 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Ov6gj-0004ed-6W for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 05:55:09 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ov6gi-0006tE-00 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:55:04 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ov6gh-0000hk-Ow for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:55:03 +0200 Original-Received: from c-24-14-16-248.hsd1.il.comcast.net ([24.14.16.248]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:55:03 +0200 Original-Received: from tzz by c-24-14-16-248.hsd1.il.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:55:03 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 21 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-24-14-16-248.hsd1.il.comcast.net 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" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:7FOXpeRVNVnbdCH4fjsulJy/ia4= X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:70774 Archived-At: On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 17:12:39 +0200 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: LMI> When doing client-side splitting, would it be reasonable to only work on LMI> the headers and the first section of each article? LMI> That would be the following command (modulo capabilities): LMI> FETCH 1:* (UID BODY.PEEK[HEADER] BODY.PEEK[1]) LMI> I'm guessing that for mail splitting purposes, it's never interesting to LMI> work on attachments. For spam.el (spam-split) and spam-stat.el, the first section is sufficient IMO. There are edge cases with HTML attachments or an enclosed message but I don't think those are worth the effort. There's a "statistical" concept in spam.el that also distinguishes between the spam backends that look at the whole article vs. those that only care about the headers. Ted