dovecot - Dec 2017 - Pigeonhole implicit keep gets unfiltered message

I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I  
misunderstanding the design?

I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially this:

filter "spam_filter";
if spamheaders {
     fileinto "spam";
     stop;
}

Mail stored in the spam folder is the filtered version, but the  
implicit-keep message is the original, unfiltered message. If I add an  
explicit `keep;` to the end, it stores the filtered version into my inbox.

Based on the filter RFC, I was expecting the implicit keep to retain the  
filtered version. Am I misinterpreting the spec?

# Adam


--
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
http://www.adamw.org

Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger:
> I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am
I
> misunderstanding the design?
>
> I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially this:
>
> filter "spam_filter";
> if spamheaders {
> ??? fileinto "spam";
> ??? stop;
> }
>
> Mail stored in the spam folder is the filtered version, but the
> implicit-keep message is the original, unfiltered message. If I add an
> explicit `keep;` to the end, it stores the filtered version into my
> inbox.
>
> Based on the filter RFC, I was expecting the implicit keep to retain
> the filtered version. Am I misinterpreting the spec?
I did a quick test, and I am not seeing any problems.

However, what is that spamheaders test in your script?

Regards,

Stephan.

> On 21 Dec, 2017, at 14:37, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl>
wrote:
>
> Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger:
>> I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't
expecting. Am I
>> misunderstanding the design?
>>
>> I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially
this:
>>
>> filter "spam_filter";
>> if spamheaders {
>>     fileinto "spam";
>>     stop;
>> }
>>
>> Mail stored in the spam folder is the filtered version, but the
>> implicit-keep message is the original, unfiltered message. If I add an
>> explicit `keep;` to the end, it stores the filtered version into my
>> inbox.
>>
>> Based on the filter RFC, I was expecting the implicit keep to retain
>> the filtered version. Am I misinterpreting the spec?
>
> I did a quick test, and I am not seeing any problems.
>
> However, what is that spamheaders test in your script?
Hi Stephan,

The block looks like this:

         ### BOGOFILTER
         filter "bogofilter_filter";

         if header :contains "X-Bogosity" [
                 "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=1.00",
                 "Spam, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.99"
         ] {
             fileinto "spam/totally";
             stop;
         }
         elsif header :contains "X-Bogosity" "Spam," {
             fileinto "spam/probably";
             stop;
         }
         elsif header :contains "X-Bogosity" "Unsure," {
             fileinto "spam/maybe";
             stop;
         }

Bogofilter adds an X-Bogosity header. With the block as it is, when it hits  
the implicit keep the message has no X-Bogosity header. When I add
'keep;'
to the end, it does have the header.

If it's just me, that's fine, as it's incredibly easy to work
around.

# Adam


--
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
http://www.adamw.org