> But I think having the spam score be available is definitely good, > because messages that are just over the spam threshold are more likely > to be false positives than messages that are way over the threshold. > > There are two things you can do with that: > > * Have two thresholds, a lower one for "mark as spam", and a > higher one for "automatically throw away". > * Sort your spam vfolder by score, so that if you have 50 messages > in it, you can scan just the first 10 or so looking for false > positives
Hmm yeah, this sounds like useful functionality although it makes the user model a bit more complicated. For example, this would mean that if we have a spam threshold setting (as we should) it would be "live": messages would become spam or not spam according to what the current setting is... > > * We put a button in the mail toolbar to mark a message as spam or > > not spam. When a message gets marked by the user as spam or not > > spam, Evolution sends it to Spamassassin to train the filter > > accordingly. > > Do we want to support running "spamassassin -r" to report it to spam > databases as well? I have never used that feature... I'll have a look. > And the inverse possibility; it would be nice to be able to check a box > to turn on the "-L" flag (local tests only), since that speeds things up > a lot and still does a very good job. Yeah, actually maybe this should be the default? > > * Should the "Junk" folder be implemented as a vfolder, like the > > Trash? > > Yes. I agree. :) -- Ettore _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
