Agreed. And it seems that there would be not conflict with placing a set of filtering rules which recognize the top anti-spam systems. I think less than 5 rules would do it.
Brennan On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:38:21 -0300 (ART), Martin Marques <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Rob Smith wrote: > >> Thomas Mangin wrote: >>> The list of Header to be checked for could be a config option like: >>> spam[HEADER]='matching header value (regex?)' >>> with the default key being X-Spam-Flag and Yes >>> >>> Thomas >>> >>> >> I agree completely with the need to have some configuration options on > this >> one. In my case, we use DSPAM, which places a X-DSPAM-RESULT header > with the >> values of Spam, Whitelisted, or Innocent. A way to tell the script what > >> header to look for, and what value(s) mean spam, would change this from > a >> feature for SpamAssassin users to something that almost everyone can > use. > > Let's see if we can agree in something: What RoundCube needs is a good > filtering system. With that, there is nothing else to add to this thread. > > -- > 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 > --------------------------------------------------------- > Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || > Centro de Telemática | '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; > Universidad Nacional | DBA, Programador, > del Litoral | Administrador > --------------------------------------------------------- > -- Brennan Stehling Offwhite.net LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
