http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4163





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-05-06 03:26 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> Subject: Re:  RFE: add reporting support to spamd/spamc
> 
> > 
> > I would like to start the spamc-part. But before I want to discuss the 
usage.
> > I think it would make sense to make reporting and learning combineable, so 
only 
> > one time the message has to be transfered to spamd. But too I want to make 
it an 
> > single useable feature.
> > Or should it be only configureable at the spamd site. So spamd would decide 
to 
> > report the message to razor...? So it could be user-dependet (sql 
> > database). 
> 
> Please feel free to get going on the spamc part, please note that I
> had to backtrack on some of the spamc portions for learning to keep it
> binary compatible, so please keep that that in mind.
> 
> You'll want to support reporting and revoking, unfortunately -r is
> already taken as an option (it is time to move to long options for
> spamc?), so do your best to come up with something sane.
> 
> No need to somehow combine the efforts, since reporting automatically
> triggers a learn as spam and revoking automatically triggers a learn
> as ham.
> 
> Lets not overthink the user dependent stuff, and just implement the
> same way as we did with learn, if someone wants to add the ability to
> turn things off later then we'll add it then.
> 
> I don't think the spamd portion will be too hard, but it might be a
> bit too ambitious for 3.1, but we'll see.
> 
> Michael
> 

As I consider this again. I think it won't be a good idea to learn 
automatically 
if triggered for report/revoke.
- report/revoke would produce some (network) overhead if done everytime a 
message is learned (especially no one remembers that report/revoke happens when 
learning is done)
- no need for a seperate spamc switch (-L already implemented)

I'am not amused not to overthink the user part.
Please introduce to query the 'use_Razor2' (and other) settings from SQL/
userpref and use that for reporting!? I think it should be!
Sorry, but I've another opinion about that :-)

>We could go simple and do something like:
>Reported: Yes
>Reported: No

I vote for that. +1 :-)

>Did you pick out command line options?

Not as you considered. I've simply add an switch (-W) to spamc! Too, there are 
some others free. Not perfectly but it works.







------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to