[nylug-talk] Evolution + Spamassassin

[Ron Guerin]

Matt Williams wrote:
> On 12/14/06, Micros50 <micros50 at verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 12:55, Ron Guerin wrote:
>>> mylar wrote:
>>>
>>>> The question is where should I place the "spamc" filter rule with
>>>> respect to my other rules ? Does it matter ?? Some indicate that it
>>>> should be the last rule in the chain. Does that sound plausible ?
>>> Just out of curiosity, shouldn't it close to first, rather than last?
>>>
>> That's what I did, I placed the spam filtering rule first and it  seems
>> to be producing the desired result.  Of  course I am assuming that
>> Evolution's behavior is to follow the rules in order.
> 
> I'm interested in why this matters. It seems like executing the spam filter
> first would spare a few CPU cycles by eliminating the need to run through
> all of your regular filters for every C14L15 mailing. Otherwise, is there a
> technical reason why spamc would "need" to be in any specific position
> to function correctly? I'm admittedly ignorant of this - just curious.

The difference is anything prior to the spamc rule would remain
unfiltered.  As an example for why that matters, although we do make
every _reasonable_ effort to keep spam from being passed on via this
list, "reasonable" from our standpoint is trying to strike a balance
that keeps spam down without killing non-spam or excluding our
legitimate list members.  That means your own filtering may be more
effective for you than what we do inbound on the list traffic, as we
have to err on the conservative side of things.

In short, I don't recommend anyone rely on our anti-spam measures, or
those of any other mailing list to keep the crap out of their inbox.

- Ron