[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bogofilter behavior
From: |
Ted Zlatanov |
Subject: |
Re: bogofilter behavior |
Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:27:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004, matthias.andree@gmx.de wrote:
> Ted, you would have to use bogofilter -V instead (capital letter 'V'
> vee).
OK. I don't use Bogofilter so I'd appreciate your help.
VERSION: spam ham spam-strong ham-strong
0.11.0: -s -n -S -N
Can you continue the table?
> I'd suggest refusing to work with bogofilter versions older than
> 0.10.2 and it's recommended to warn about versions older than 0.17.5
> which is now three months old. Remember that bogofilter 0.X versions
> are still under development.
It's hard to give the boot to the users like that. Gnus is in Emacs,
and that means we have to handle old software too occasionally. I'd
rather build a table as shown above and keep updating it, and then
use -V to auto-guess it when spam.el is loaded (unless the user
overrides the switches).
Thanks
Ted
- Re: bogofilter behavior, (continued)
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Harry Putnam, 2004/08/03
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Harry Putnam, 2004/08/03
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Reiner Steib, 2004/08/03
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Harry Putnam, 2004/08/03
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Ted Zlatanov, 2004/08/04
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Harry Putnam, 2004/08/04
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Matthias Andree, 2004/08/05
- Re: bogofilter behavior,
Ted Zlatanov <=
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Matthias Andree, 2004/08/08
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Ted Zlatanov, 2004/08/09
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Matthias Andree, 2004/08/10
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Ted Zlatanov, 2004/08/10
- Re: bogofilter behavior, Matthias Andree, 2004/08/05
Re: bogofilter behavior, Matthias Andree, 2004/08/05