On 29 May 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 2004, daniel@rimspace.net wrote:
>
>> So, in the hope that others don't have to suffer through the same stuff
>> that I did I have embarked on updating the spam.el documentation in the
>> Gnus manual.
>>
>> Assuming, of course, that you are happy to have me rewriting the content
>> for you, and that you wouldn't mind doing a technical review of it once
>> I am done - I still don't understand it as well as you do. :)
>
> No problem.  I hope you don't have to rewrite too much.  

Technically the content was in great shape. It was mostly the overall
structure, and the clarity of some of the sections.

Hopefully what I have achieve is:

1. simplify the "how things work" section by removing technical detail
2. simplify the "how do I set up ..." sections by breaking them up
3. add central references for "how do I use this test or processor"
4. added helpful examples
5. documented some settings more comprehensively

The patch is attached, and it really needs a technical review and a
bunch of people to read it and tell me where they feel it is lacking.

> Note that there's some new features, e.g. CRM114 and
> spam-report-resend, which are not in the manual at all (I generally
> add things after they've been beta-tested). I would look at the
> ChangeLog to see what has been added to spam.el since the last manual
> update.

Well, I added CRM114 and `spam-report-resend' to the manual, but only as
very brief notes.

Speaking of which, it would be nice to (while the code is fresh) change
the `spam-report-resend' interface a bit. At the moment it only does
spam reporting, but there is no reason that it can't do ham reporting
with exactly the same interface.

So, remove the `spam-resend-to' group parameter, replace it with
`spam-resend-spam-to' and `spam-resend-ham-to', and then make the
obvious change to the `spam-use-resend' definition and all.

No patch, because I am lazy, but I might try to work one up if you don't
beat me to it. :)

>> Also, what is your preferred method for submission of the changes? I can
>> send a patch generated against CVS, or whatever else you would like.
>
> Patch is fine.

Please find attached one patch. :)

>> I can't commit to Gnus CVS, though, so I can't put it in that way.
>
> I think CVS access can be arranged, but I don't have the authority to
> grant it.  Maybe Lars could do it?

That would make this sort of work easier to manage, but I can easily
enough wait until the patch is committed and not change the
documentation until then, or regenerate against current CVS until people
are happy.

    Daniel