On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:38:39 -0600
"Paul R. Ganci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alan Premselaar wrote:
>
> >> perhaps all I am really asking is if there is a way to allow
> >> spamassassin to just stop processing a message that is in a
> >> blacklist to save the cycles? I am not asking for spama
Paul R. Ganci wrote:
> This is somewhat a philosophical question, but I will ask it anyways.
> Recent discussions have occurred on this list regarding what
> Spamassassin should do with Spam. The recent consensus seems to be that
> it is only Spamassassin's job to tag Spam and that some other progr
Paul R. Ganci wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 23:34:22 -0600:
> However, I don't
> necessarily agree with the above because while I can add a procmail rule
> to handle a specific user's blacklist I can't get back the wasted CPU
> cycles which spamassassin expended
But that's up to *your* setup. If y
> Why is it not a good idea for Spamassassin to immediately
>send to /dev/null a message flagged in somebody's blacklist ASAP ...
>i.e. no further processing? Is the only way to handle this via a
>procmail recipe? Similar what about a whitelist ... shouldn't
>it be sent
>on as Ham ASAP ... i.e
Alan Premselaar wrote:
perhaps all I am really asking is if there is a way to allow
spamassassin to just stop processing a message that is in a blacklist
to save the cycles? I am not asking for spamassassin to become an
MTA/MDA.
In that case it would be ultimately more efficient to add a rej
Paul R. Ganci wrote:
Alan Premselaar wrote:
Philosophically, it makes more sense for SpamAssassin to focus on
identifying SPAM, and let another application (MTA, procmail, etc)
focus on what it was primarily designed for: processing
(delivery,rejection,etc) of said email. It's certainly no m
Alan Premselaar wrote:
Philosophically, it makes more sense for SpamAssassin to focus on
identifying SPAM, and let another application (MTA, procmail, etc)
focus on what it was primarily designed for: processing
(delivery,rejection,etc) of said email. It's certainly no more of a
hassle to ad
Paul R. Ganci wrote:
This is somewhat a philosophical question, but I will ask it anyways.
Recent discussions have occurred on this list regarding what
Spamassassin should do with Spam. The recent consensus seems to be that
it is only Spamassassin's job to tag Spam and that some other program
This is somewhat a philosophical question, but I will ask it anyways.
Recent discussions have occurred on this list regarding what
Spamassassin should do with Spam. The recent consensus seems to be that
it is only Spamassassin's job to tag Spam and that some other program
should decide what to
