Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > Having yet to see a 100% accurate spam filter, you are correct. I run a > tagging-only spam filter and strongly recommend the use of tagging-only > spam filters. Philosophical debate and I'm sure we both have strong and > valid opinions not worthy arguing here ;-)
Well, our spam filter has a quarantine from which we can release FPs. So we get the best of both worlds: The ability to release FPs without having to process tagged mail in our delivery agents. [...] > Anyway, I know I had a quite a long patch for vacation. It's a bit of > conjecture and recalling emails from 7 years ago, but I seem to remember > that they referred to vacation a bit as an unloved stepchild. You're probably right. > In short, they listened but adding flexibility to vacation to deal with > (or not deal with as the case may be) spam, etc. was not on their list > of goals and they pointed me towards procmail. Somewhat OT... has anyone had experience with Mail::Audit to replace procmail? http://search.cpan.org/~rjbs/Mail-Audit-2.225/lib/Mail/Audit.pm I *detest* the procmail syntax, and keep meaning One Of These Days to poke around with Mail::Audit. Regards, David. _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
