From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: rgh@roughage.com.au (Richard Heycock)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:09:04 +1000
Subject: [sup-talk] Spam hooks.
In-Reply-To: <1207825216-sup-4659@tomsk>
References: <1207735298-sup-7690@wrasse> <1207771005-sup-8074@tomsk>
	<1207775231-sup-6370@wrasse> <1207823540-sup-3480@tomsk>
	<1207825216-sup-4659@tomsk>
Message-ID: <1207832718-sup-7937@wrasse>

Excerpts from Marcus Williams's message of Thu Apr 10 21:04:32 +1000 2008:
> On 10.4.2008, I wrote:
> > On 9.4.2008, Richard Heycock wrote:
> > > That would be great. I just need the basic idea and I should be able
> > > to take it form there.
> > 
> > ... patch is winging its way to sup-talk as I write this. Its against
> > next but it should patch cleanly against master. Some quick pointers
> > for the mark-as-spam.rb:

I had a quick look and it doesn't seem too onerous.

> Note that perhaps I should also add that this hook gets run on "toggle"
> of the spam flag. So you probably want to check which way its been
> toggled by looking for the :spam flag in the labels set if you want to
> be extra careful. I think you can probably just use the thread
> object's labels to do this.

Ok.

dspam allows you to also retrain on false positives as well so it would
be worth detecting which way the spam toggle was and either send a
message to spam if it's spam and ham if it's not.

rgh

> Marcus

-- 
+61 (0) 410 646 369
rgh at neoss.com.au

You're worried criminals will continue to penetrate into cyberspace, and
I'm worried complexity, poor design and mismanagement will be there to meet
them - Marcus Ranum

!DSPAM:47fe1170198729375562959!