From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/55511 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ding@daphne.gnuu.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?Thomas_H=FChn?=) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: should gnus-registry.el be in the manual for Oort Gnus? Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 23:11:36 +0100 Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: <87hdzet3mu.fsf@daphne.gnuu.de> References: <4n65hiyow2.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1073081542 3669 80.91.224.253 (2 Jan 2004 22:12:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 22:12:22 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M4051@lists.math.uh.edu Fri Jan 02 23:12:19 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 1AcXWl-0001vw-00 for ; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 23:12:19 +0100 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 1AcXWZ-0006Dw-00; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:12:07 -0600 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1AcXWV-0006Dr-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:12:03 -0600 Original-Received: from uucp.gnuu.de (uucp.gnuu.de [151.189.0.84]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9CA13A0026 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:12:02 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from uucp@localhost) by uucp.gnuu.de (8.12.9/8.12.9) with UUCP id i02MBv87034452 for ding@gnus.org; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 23:11:57 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from daphne.gnuu.de (daphne.gnuu.de [127.0.0.1]) by daphne.gnuu.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A470CB7576 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 23:11:36 +0100 (CET) Original-To: Ding Mailing List In-Reply-To: <4n65hiyow2.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:03:41 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1004 (Gnus v5.10.4) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:55511 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:55511 Also sprach Ted Zlatanov : > - tracking of spam processor invocations I know this isn't really spam.el-specific, but does that mean that one could force spam.el not to register a mail with bogofilter twice? I'm still playing around with my spam.el-configuration. Actually I'd like to have something like this: - new mail arrives - fancy splitting (with spam-split at the beginning) - spam goes into "nnml:spam", everything else into it's folder - ham in the spam group is un-registered and moved into a suitable nnml-group - spam in any "normal" group is registered and moved to spam where it expires At the moment I am almost there. I have my spam-group and several unclassified, "normal" groups. I don't classify them as ham because I think mails in that group might be re-registered over and over again, thus poisoning the bogofilter database. Am I correct there? I'd like to be able to set any mark (excluding spam-mark) on mails in these groups. Since I'm a bit lazy, I leave the spam group and they get registered with bogofilter. But I do not move the "good" mails to a ham group to train bogofilter with them. And now I'm ended up with 14 MB spamlist and 2.5 MB goodlist. Am I right about that re-registering of good mails when I classify all of my normal mail groups as ham or have I understood something wrong? And that's where your registry comes into play? With that one could avoid this and classify almost everything as ham groups? BTW, the spam.el-specific part of my .gnus begins thus: (spam-initialize) (setq spam-install-hooks t) ;(spam-install-hooks-function) (setq spam-use-bogofilter t) (setq spam-mark-ham-unread-before-move-from-spam-group t) (require 'spam) I think that the Info indicated that one should put in spam-install-hooks (which resulted in an error) before you commited your big doc patch. So can I leave out everything except spam-initialize and spam-use-bogofilter? Thomas