From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/83468 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: imap splitting to mail.misc? Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 12:58:12 +0800 Message-ID: <87y59ojl3v.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87y59pl6cp.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87txkdz1dp.fsf@enricoschumann.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1372827542 19395 80.91.229.3 (3 Jul 2013 04:59:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 04:59:02 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M31728@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Jul 03 06:59:00 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UuF9f-0005CG-Gc for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 06:58:59 +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 1UuF8p-0004Io-Cb; Tue, 02 Jul 2013 23:58:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1UuF8n-0004IZ-Jm for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 02 Jul 2013 23:58:05 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UuF8m-0003Cx-QR for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 02 Jul 2013 23:58:05 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UuF8k-00084l-TH for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 06:58:02 +0200 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UuF8j-0004P6-K5 for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 06:58:01 +0200 Original-Received: from 114.250.125.27 ([114.250.125.27]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 06:58:01 +0200 Original-Received: from eric by 114.250.125.27 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2013 06:58:01 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 43 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 114.250.125.27 User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:m6itTy/yyGd3oDaJfdwL8R/2/DE= X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin (3.3.1 2010-03-16) analysis follows Bayesian score: 0.0000 Ham tokens: 0.000-2278--13983h-0s--0d--H*u:Emacs, 0.000-703--4311h-0s--0d--H*u:Gnus, 0.000-661--4056h-0s--0d--H*UA:linux, 0.000-661--4055h-0s--0d--H*u:linux, 0.000-650--3991h-0s--0d--H*UA:gnu Spam tokens: 0.989-8387--550h-43926s--0d--HX-Spam-Relays-External:quimby.gnus.org, 0.989-8387--550h-43926s--0d--H*RU:quimby.gnus.org, 0.989-8026--528h-42039s--0d--HTo:D*gnus.org, 0.986-8239--699h-43928s--0d--HX-Spam-Relays-Internal:quimby.gnus.org, 0.986-8239--699h-43928s--0d--H*RT:80.91.231.51 Autolearn status: no 2.2 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2 FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2 1.2 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.91.229.3 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:83468 Archived-At: Enrico Schumann writes: > On Tue, 02 Jul 2013, Eric Abrahamsen writes: > > > [...] > >> >> And is it actually a mistake to leave anything in INBOX? Or rather, a >> mistake to split things *back* into the INBOX? Maybe I should be making >> myself a separate box and splitting all unmatched messages into that? >> But I would still have to assume that some messages would end up in >> "mail.misc", as they do now... >> > > Hm, I don't use nnimap-split-fancy, but nnimap-split-rule. Then you > don't need a 'catch-all' split rule. From the manual: > > "Nnmail users might recollect that the last regexp had to be empty to > match all articles [...]. This is not required in nnimap. Articles > not matching any of the regexps will not be moved out of your inbox." > > But that does not explain where "mail.misc" comes from.... > > Regards, > Enrico Thanks! I don't think `nnimap-split-rule' exists any more in the newer versions, there's just `nnimap-split-methods' (the docstring of which doesn't mention the final empty regex issue), and `nnimap-split-fancy'. I tried taking off the default "INBOX" split in my nnimap-split-fancy, and resplitting. The result was just the same: about a third of the messages went into "mail.misc". I did notice this time that the ones that _stayed_ in the INBOX were all mailing-list messages, with subjects that generally included a "[some-list-name]" string in them. That's only true for one of several accounts, though. The others show no pattern that I can see. Curious! E