[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gnus nnml/nnimap-split-fancy

From: Amin Bandali
Subject: Re: gnus nnml/nnimap-split-fancy
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 16:10:10 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)

Phillip Lord <> writes:

> Amin Bandali <> writes:
>> Phillip Lord <> writes:
>>> Is there a way to get either nnml or nnimap split across backends?
>> Not that I know of, but I too would love to be able to split across
>> backends, e.g. from one nnimap backend to another, or from an nnimap
>> backend to an nnfolder one perhaps.
> Yes, and I don't understand why not. I wonder how big a fix it would be.

I have no idea.  Lars, Eric, what do you think?

>> [...]
>>> Finally, with nnimap splitting, the default group is "bogus". How I
>>> specific "don't do anything with the message, but leave it where it
>>> is"?
>> I manually specify the name of the inbox like so:
>> (nnimap "gnu"
>>         ;; [...]
>>         (nnimap-inbox "INBOX")
>>         (nnimap-split-methods 'nnimap-split-fancy)
>>         (nnimap-split-fancy (|
>>                              ;; [...]
>>                              ;; otherwise, leave mail in INBOX
>>                              "INBOX")))
>> Not sure if there's a better way.
> And does that work? I mean it doesn't remove the message and then read
> add it or some such? I presume that splitting only happens over unread
> messages, because I use "inbox infinite" -- so I get a lot of messages
> there.

Yeah it works fine for me, at least for nnimap, I'd imagine because of
C-h v nnimap-unsplittable-articles RET, defaulting to '(%Deleted %Seen),
meaning that messages marked as deleted or read should not be subject to
splitting.  That said, I think an explicit "do nothing" rule would be
nice indeed.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]