From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/57873 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Pittman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Improving the spam.el documentation. Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 11:29:31 +1000 Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: <87ekoqu9ac.fsf@enki.rimspace.net> References: <87smdk8yxs.fsf@enki.rimspace.net> <4nfz9kecvc.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8765ac3elm.fsf@enki.rimspace.net> <4nvfi3parm.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1086660157 11016 80.91.224.253 (8 Jun 2004 02:02:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 02:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M6414@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Jun 08 04:02:29 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BXVwb-0001gv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:02:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1BXVw9-0004k1-00; Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:02:01 -0500 Original-Received: from util2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.23]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1BXVw2-0004jv-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:01:54 -0500 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by util2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BXVvz-0003U3-3d for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:01:51 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353483A0034 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2004 21:01:49 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BXVvv-0007bQ-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:01:47 +0200 Original-Received: from 203-217-29-45.perm.iinet.net.au ([203.217.29.45]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:01:47 +0200 Original-Received: from daniel by 203-217-29-45.perm.iinet.net.au with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:01:47 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 203-217-29-45.perm.iinet.net.au Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEUnIyatfG0aGBsMChBG NThoSkb52Lk0unwsAAACeElEQVR42l2UMZPbIBCF9zDqw4xRzYDTO5LTY92SWsyx11NE//8n5AGK LxMVtkcfb/fxWEzr61nWfx8aX57CnVUI/wPNRQH41Ycv4PGZJEZ/25pSjbKeXLwsTkrimArWeNdb eU+aNzVJkkJlJ78uzvu/IGqRImXnElHHkQ/BAzjUEBErPhXyS3CMtwvAQuhgjOzJGFOCd5p8e/Dp JOWS7HwchynK3QhtwgrwvXAqn+39Ua9818qBLAConbi/P6ot5Iiol6JiSZ51ACMNIAIodLJ0zccJ bKQGoKD4vN7EvMBO5AbgXCaxx6sUnXZTEZuSGc0RAXoMhUi6NlDBbJEdqbrY7L5ABogqOkfq3hXY tEx1NnIcNttyQ4qqKcqe0ANdcwPGbHB72tW2vFVT52YKoVBs8a6kI0t5M6fbw1iKEIRATCmlt3lk aGaTS3F9HxwLjI39/c4ZgHyLl5gZvnopA1fW7IgKW8SZ48jN6GEyfO3DFmmNI5/PEA1qkRs9HLOk ExgLLbkRoiMt3EtVjIQY63T8As98KrL5hp2No/Vaokg9JeitmakpFKF7qafEREwGx35cjlOSsXWD RLg/DeAnDNcTRKzvxLfBivx5wBiyv7YO1Ir5VivSPNzmK1JVRHqMBKKHp6NKls31Imi+NAnxOTzb eiflOhi3IfWt292HRfWVDQS/3g09MQ60qXVRWIfUGwjhh2h+ME9aPeIYxBYJrnbe9g0zqLegY5/D BqBc6nvC9b+Jv3B0uPodtEr2AvuF9zvxhhDfcW+bImR7wXlNMdBPxkWjfe0K/6hWuYlZT2ihMNUp 4r9kWcKvanWOj+2DAkeFE0xpD38AQw3cf9DOFKYAAAAASUVORK5CYII= User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) XEmacs/21.4 (Security Through Obscurity, linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:USkbbkGp2CtAt9YSBc8zPKyEZMA= Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:57873 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:57873 On 8 Jun 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2004, daniel@rimspace.net wrote: [...] >> 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. > > Hmm, I made the second one "ham-resend-to" which is convenient but > now I'm using "ham" for spam.el variables. I'm not sure if that's a > big problem. It occurred to me today that it might be a bit easier for people to deal with the spam and ham processors in the from of two group parameters, `spam-process' and `ham-process', rather than `spam-process' having a `spam' or `ham' designator before each processor... I don't know, though, if it is worth the trouble of changing over. :) Daniel -- No, no, you're not thinking, you're just being logical. -- Niels Bohr