On Mon,28.Jul.08, 14:57:16, Arvind Marathe wrote: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Andrei Popescu > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun,27.Jul.08, 17:07:29, Arvind Marathe wrote: > > > >> OK some more investigation. All the d-u mails, getting listed as spam, > >> have X-Spam-Checker-Version, X-Spam-Level and X-Spam-Status, in their > >> headers. For eg. one of the mails has: > >> > >> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on liszt.debian.org > >> X-Spam-Level: > >> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=4.0 tests=MDO_DATING2 autolearn=no > >> version=3.2.3 > >> > >> Andrei's mails and the mutt mailing list mails do not have these > >> headers. > > > > Gee, glad to know I'm special cased! I think it's actually due to the > > fact that I'm using gmail as well. > > I don't think so. I still think it is because you "cc" to me. All > mails that were "cc"ed to me were dumped fine. And my own mails (from > gmail) to the list, which did not have my address as "cc", were dumped > as spam. Hhmm, interesting...
> > Are you sure you don't want to try > > maildrop instead of procmail? > > Busy right now, but won't mind trying it after a few days. Is it > better than procmail? how? Because you can actually read the rules? :) Don't worry, it's just a matter of preference, like vim vs. emacs, KDE vs. Gnome. You will find strong advocates on both sides, but in the end it's a matter of preference. > ps: btw, why do you "cc" to the sender? I am assuming you do some sort > of reply-all. The mails I Cc'd you had Reply-To and Mail-Followup-To set (this one doesn't, but I think you didn't use mutt). I always use mutt's Reply-To-List. My guess is you have a 'subscribe' stanza for this list in your muttrc. This is actually not needed, mutt does the Right Thing (tm) by default. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
