From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/54893
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: lorentey@elte.hu (=?iso-8859-2?q?L=F5rentey_K=E1roly?=)
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: spam.el: automatically resplitting ham in a spam group?
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:42:19 +0100
Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu
Message-ID: <lorentey.g.ding.871xs27ugk.elte@eris.elte.hu>
References: <lorentey.g.ding.874qx0gzl8.elte@eris.elte.hu>
	<4nfzgkdqzx.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu>
	<lorentey.g.ding.87llqbw7un.elte@eris.elte.hu>
	<4nu14zjhj4.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1069353774 2701 80.91.224.253 (20 Nov 2003 18:42:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:42:54 +0000 (UTC)
Original-X-From: ding-owner+M3433@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Nov 20 19:42:51 2003
Return-path: <ding-owner+M3433@lists.math.uh.edu>
Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1AMtlT-0005OB-00
	for <ding-account@gmane.org>; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:42:51 +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 1AMtl7-0002zL-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:42:29 -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 1AMtkz-0002yz-00
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:42:21 -0600
Original-Received: from eris.elte.hu (eris.elte.hu [157.181.150.146])
	by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DBA23A0025
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:42:20 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: by eris.elte.hu (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 4C1C67F816; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:42:19 +0100 (CET)
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
In-Reply-To: <4nu14zjhj4.fsf@lockgroove.bwh.harvard.edu> (Ted Zlatanov's
 message of "Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:28:31 -0500")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux)
Precedence: bulk
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:54893
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:54893

Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> That's not necessarily the only problem.  The real issue is that the
> destination is being decided dynamically, so every function in the
> splitting sequence would have to know that returning the name of the
> current group is not OK - we don't want the ham to stay in the spam
> group, no matter what.

Actually, in border cases, putting the ham right back to the spam
group is exactly what I would expect the respooling mechanism to do.

For example, with the following split rule, if I set the ham process
destination of mail.spam.silly-people to 'respool, I expect that all
ham in that group to reappear there after the resplit, each and every
time I exit that group:

	("from" "lorentey@.*elte\\.hu" "mail.spam.silly-people")

I expect the same from non-spam splitting functions.  I know, it's not
very useful, but at least it's not confusing either.

(Actually, the respool already puts ham back in a spam group sometimes
when I manually respool the articles in my mail.ham.proven group.  In
my case, disabling spam-split during the respool takes care of this
from now on, but I have not been bothered by this effect at all.)

--=20
K=E1roly