Re: spam/ham exit processors

[Kai Grossjohann <kai@emptydomain.de>]

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

> Sure, you could have spam moved from all groups to "nnml:spam" [1] and
> then process spam only in "nnml:spam".  I do that, and furthermore I
> have the spam-process-destination parameter of "nnml:spam" set to
> "nnml:train" so I can run SpamAssassin directly on the "nnml:spam"
> group's file contents.  In "nnml:spam" I have the
> ham-process-destination set to "nnml:mail" and thus when I tick an
> article in the spam group it gets popped and ham-processed back into
> "nnml:mail".  It's a pretty tidy system.

Why do you have two groups, nnml:spam and nnml:train?  Hm.  Ah, maybe
it is in order to avoid training SA on all spam.  You look at
nnml:spam first, then you catch all ham from there.  Only *real* spam
is moved to nnml:train.  So you're not training SA with "fake spam".

So it's a system similar to mine; I have nnimap:INBOX.spam instead of
nnml:spam and nnimap:INBOX.makespam instead of nnml:train.  And I only
train Bogofilter on the borderline cases, so I don't move all spam
from nnimap:INBOX.spam to nnimap:INBOX.makespam.

But maybe it would be a good idea to do that.

Kai