-M inconsistency

[Boris 'pi' Piwinger]

David Relson wrote:

> Not so.  It used to be that mailbox processing happened only during
> registration, i.e. -s, -n, -S, and -N.  During scoring, each input file
> was treated as a single message and gave a single score.

Right. I don't see any reason for that difference. Why would
you want to score an mbox as a single message?

> To make it consistant, -M would be necessary when registering mailboxes.

Either that or -M would never be needed.

> FWIW, "-vM" produces useful output.

Right, but -v does not and that might be expected.

>> Bogofilter without options on mbox does not make any sense
>> and hence should produce an error I think.
> 
> Are you suggesting that -M be required when processing mailboxes?

I suggest always or never, I don't really have a strong
opinion which way.

Using bogofilter with no option (so we only get the exit
code) on an mbox cannot give a useful answer. So error seems
to be the correct state.

>> So what to do? I don't know how autodetection is done, but
>> it works, so it should also work for -v and -T (-t, -TT).
>> 
>> BTW: -t could also go completely.
> 
> '-t' is eye candy.  It provides a terse mode of output whose format can
> be controlled.  See "terse_format" in bogofilter.cv.example

I know that. But I think this is one of the options which
could go without loosing any functionality. If you really
want controlled output, -v already produces that.

pi