Re: spam.el and IMAP

[Adrian Lanz <lanz@fowi.ethz.ch>]

On 24 Oct 2003, tzz@lifelogs.com wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003, 4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de wrote:
>
>> BTW, is there a simple way to tell `spam.el' to put ham articles
>> from "Spam/spamblock" to both, "bayes/ham" _and_ "INBOX"?
>> I.e. probably first copy the article to the first group and then
>> move it to the second.
>
> I see no reason why we can't handle multiple groups for
> {spam,ham}-process-destination.  I added the necessary code but it's
> untested - please try it out and let me know how it works.
>
> We used to use gnus-summary-move-article, now it's
> gnus-summary-copy-article followed by gnus-summary-delete-article.
> I assume an error in copy-article will abort the delete as well.

Using spam.el WITHOUT IMAP: I don't like this! Now I get asked every
time I exit the summary buffer if I really want to delete the articles
processed by gnus-group-*-exit-processor-*.

(Furthermore - but this I will verify or falsify upon further testing
- the functions seem to delete the articles but not copy them!?)

Thanks, Adrian