Quoting Johannes Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I do think, however, that the two plugins could possibly converge.
I don't think they can converge, they work in very different ways,
since yours work at the IMAP level while mine works at the storage
level.
Actually, I work at storage level too now,
Quoting Johannes Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
plugin {
(...)
pipe = /var/learn/%u/.spam:spamc -d some.host -L spam
pipe2 = /var/learn/%u/.ham:spamc -d some.host -L ham
(...)
And here I define that any message stored to /var/learn/%u/.spam where
%u is the username (that is learn.spam in
plugin {
(...)
pipe = /var/learn/%u/.spam:spamc -d some.host -L spam
pipe2 = /var/learn/%u/.ham:spamc -d some.host -L ham
(...)
And here I define that any message stored to /var/learn/%u/.spam where
%u is the username (that is learn.spam in the user's IMAP namespace) has
to be
Oh. I missed that.
I had a look at your plugin, quite some time ago, and did not think
you would have modified it in such a way.
http://johannes.sipsolutions.net/Projects/dovecot-antispam
I should definitely give it a look; how to you figure out where the
mail comes from?
TBH, I
It certainly is a matter of taste, but that also was the reason why I
did not like your plugin... ;-)
Aha, but with what I proposed that becomes a matter of configuration,
hence my SPAM* rule in there.
Lastly, I'd prefer my user to make some explicit action to learn a
message rather
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
It's on my todo list in order to support user-site SPAM training.
BTW: Could you please add the example of your first message into the
plugin tgz? So the useage info is with the package.
Bye,
- --
Hi,
Ben Schumacher wrote:
Could you maybe explain how the configuration works in a little more
detail? For some reason I'm having a bit of trouble wrapping my head
around how this works:
What is the part you don't understand?
namespace private {
separator = .
location =
Timo Sirainen wrote:
I downloaded it when you first mentioned it, but looks like I never got
around to actually looking at it. Yes, something like this would be
nice..
One thing at least that should be changed is to configure it using
virtual mailbox names instead of full mailbox paths.
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 15:29 +0100, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
I think write() can return partially written data if the other side
isn't reading it fast enough. Using write_full() instead would anyway be
better/safer.
I just reread my code, and I think my use of write looks safe, since
only
On 05.12.2007 17:29, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
Hi,
A few months ago, I sent a message to this list asking if people would
be interested by a pipe plugin (see
http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2007-May/023005.html ). I received
a few answers of people who told they were intersted.
A few months
On Dec 5, 2007 7:29 AM, Nicolas Boullis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few months ago, I sent a message to this list asking if people would
be interested by a pipe plugin (see
http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2007-May/023005.html ). I received
a few answers of people who told they were
On Wed, December 5, 2007 3:29 pm, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
...
A few months ago, I sent a message to this list asking if people would
be interested by a pipe plugin
...
Since then, I have received no feedback...
...
So, is anyone using this plugin? Is anyone using it?
Haven't tried it so I can
Hi,
A few months ago, I sent a message to this list asking if people would
be interested by a pipe plugin (see
http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2007-May/023005.html ). I received
a few answers of people who told they were intersted.
A few months later, I sent a new message announcing the
13 matches
Mail list logo
