[antispam-f] Re: Marking messages
- From: Frank de Bruijn <antispam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: antispam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 20:37:54 +0100
In article <6fcefb8b4e.harriet@xxxxxxxxxx>,
Harriet Bazley <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2006 as I do recall, Mark Fraser wrote:
> > In article <4e8b6cf4e8antispam@xxxxxxxxxx>,
> > Frank de Bruijn <antispam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > In article <4e8b42da80tricia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > Tricia Garner <tricia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > I have just started to investigate marking, which seems to be
> > > > successful except I find it confusing that mail already marked and
> > > > dealt with is still mentioned in the marking window several days later.
> >
> > I get that if the email is no longer on the server, which is either because
> > I've logged into the webmail system and marked the emails as spam or it's
> > just vanished!!
>
> I get this too -- I have a constant supply of 'deferred' e-mails
> clogging up the Marking window until they expire of old age, even if
> they subsequently get collected.
That could be caused by the 'Marling loop' bug that Ian Hamilton brought
to my attention. Or it may have something to do with the 'Use UIDL'
setting. I'm definitely going to remove that as an option and make it
the default. The next release will only use Message-IDs if the UIDL
command isn't supported by the server.
Using UIDL values, the immediate expiry of messages from the list (as
Mark suggested) can be reliably implemented. I think we could even lose
the 'Message-IDs expire after...' setting.
> I thought there was an option in some recent version of AntiSpam to
> switch off marking of deferred e-mail, but I seem to have lost it
> somewhere. :-(
Not really. There's 'Remember deferred and headered messages' (on the
Scan frame), but that does something different. Actually, if you don't
want to mark deferred/headered messages, switching off 'Check
Message-IDs' is probably your best option.
Regards,
Frank
Other related posts:
