> To save some SpamAssassin processing, and further differentiate these two
> groups, I believe you could use the same table to also bypass spam checks:
>
> @bypass_spam_checks_maps = ( read_hash("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
True.
Even better is to have the @bypass_spam_checks_maps be the SAME list
(not just an identicaly copy) of @spam_lovers_maps:
@spam_lovers_maps = ( read_hash("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
@bypass_spam_checks_maps = @spam_lovers_maps;
or the same thing in a single statement::
@bypass_spam_checks_maps = @spam_lovers_maps =
( read_hash("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
> # All other users opt out of spam-handling
> .xyz.com
Btw, this could be just the:
> # All other users opt out of spam-handling
> .
(just in case there are other local domains besides .xyz.com)
> If I am correct, I think it's a good idea to use both bypass_spam_checks
> and spam_lovers for those who wish to be excluded from spam processing.
> Correct me if I am wrong.
Correct.
If I knew how much confusion the semantics of bypass_* vs. *_lovers
is causing, I would have provide only _lovers, and derive bypass_
automatically from it. Perhaps some day...
Mark
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
AMaViS-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user
AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3
AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
