Ted Zlatanov <t...@lifelogs.com> writes: > On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 09:53:14 -0600 Tommy Kelly <tommy.ke...@verilab.com> > wrote: > > TK> All that said. I'm new here and have invested a mere fraction of the > TK> hours in this project that y'all have. So don't hesitate to pat me on > TK> the head and say "Shhhh! The grown-ups are speaking." :-) > > Nah, that would be condescending. We do passive-aggressive :) > > Seriously, your feedback is appreciated. You have invested a lot of > time fighting features and jargon that are implied or learned for many > of the Gnus regulars, so your experience helps us. If we don't respond > or fix things quickly (speaking for myself) it's for lack of time, not > desire to help. > > Ted >
While you're here Ted, I have had to stop using spam-split. Possibly you can see what is wrong with this? (setq spam-use-bogofilter t) (setq spam-use-spamassassin t) (require 'spam) (spam-initialize) (setq nnimap-inbox '("INBOX")) (setq nnimap-split-fancy '(| (: spam-split) "INBOX")) (setq nnimap-split-methods 'nnimap-split-fancy) (setq nnimap-split-download-body t) I then set the spam settings using G c on the groups I want spam-split to process. I get some form of sequencep errors I think it is. Sorry to be vague - I cant post a backtrace right now but can again tomorrow if you're interested in taking a look. I dont *think* there is anything wrong with the above but few people have offered up other split examples using spam-split to compare it against. I am guessing my quoting is wrong but its hard to pinpoint from the manual examples. regards r. _______________________________________________ info-gnus-english mailing list info-gnus-english@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-gnus-english