Re: spam.el - ham in spam groups

[Jonas Steverud <tvrud@bredband.net>]

Marcelo Toledo <marcelo@marcelotoledo.org> writes:

> I dont know if there is a reason for this but I think all this steps
> should't exist. If there is ham in spam it must be repooled again and
> not moved to another group that has nothing to do with.

On my nnfolder:Spam group, I have the Group Parameter
(ham-process-destination respool) which respools the article on group exit.

> And more, it must be spooled but it can't pass through spam-split again,
> because if I marked it as ham there is no need test again.

Why *can't* it be ran through spam-split? Your filter has been told it
is ham (I assume you train it on exit) so it should pass through
spam-split without problem. If it ends up in the spam group again it
is just a good thing to retrain the filter. See the redundant
spam-split pass as a check that the training went all right.

I don't think that it is a way of telling the splitting to "*this*
rule shall not be applied to *this* email" - it might be possible by
adding a user defined function in a : construct to check if it should
be sent to spam-split or not, but I think it is more work then it is
worth. You loose some performance on running spam-split but I think
you have to live with it. OTOH, it takes you longer to read the email
then to respool it through spam-split... ;-)

HTH.

/Jonas
-- 
(        http://hem.bredband.net/steverud/        !     Wei Wu Wei     )
(        Meaning of U2 Lyrics, Roleplaying        !  To Do Without Do  )