[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-daboo-sieve-spamtest-00.txt (fwd)

2002-07-28 14:42:51


--On Sunday, July 28, 2002 12:45 PM -0700 
ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:

|> Are implementations likely to have multiple spam filter algorithms
|> available? If so, would it be worthwhile to allow you to choose one
|> dynamically?
| It's possible, I guess. A testtype parameter might be appropriate. Its
| argument could be compared against the list of available schemes. In the
| case of no match a default scheme would be used.

The problem with this is that the script author needs to know what implementations are available on the system. I really wanted spamtest to be completely independent of the backend spam checking so scripts could be simple and portable. If there is more than one spam checker in use, then I think spamtest results will simply be based on some combination of the two (or more) sets of spam check results - and the sieve implementation would be smart about figuring that out. If a user really wants finer grained control then they can write the spam tests explicitly in the script rather than use spamtest.

Cyrus Daboo