Request for comments 3

[Glenn Steen]

On 25/07/07, Steve Freegard <steve.freegard at fsl.com> wrote:
> Hi Jules,
>
> Julian Field wrote:
> >> Steve Freegard wrote:
> >>> Julian Field wrote:
> >>>>> e.g. store-nonspam will set $message->{isspam} = 0, store-mcp will
> >>>>> set $message->{ismcp} = 1 etc. and add the relevant paths in
> >>>>> $message->{quarantineplaces)??
> >>>> It wasn't going to do that, no. Simply choosing to store the message
> >>>> in a place doesn't change its spam status, surely?
> >>> Ok - true enough for spam, but to replace MCP with this new feature -
> >>> setting store-mcp would need to set $message->{ismcp} otherwise
> >>> MailWatch won't be able to tell the difference between them and the
> >>> MCP stuff will get lost in the noise (and won't get counted toward
> >>> the MCP stats).
> >> Okay, I could do that as well. It will be easy to add that.
> > Also, do you need me to do anything special if they use the store-spam
> > in the Non-Spam Actions and other combinations?
>
> Hmmm - not 100% sure on this - if non-spam actions specify store-spam
> then we could well set $message->{isspam} as that would clearly be the
> intent; same for the reverse.  The admin is taking a concious decision
> to override to outcome.  I'm just not sure if this would be useful or
> desirable.
>
I think maybe that whether it is useful to set or not isn't that
important... More important to be consistent in how we handle
things... _if_ one can do as you describe, would it be logical to
_not_ set it as spam? IMO... I think not.

My .02 SEK
Cheers
-- 
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se