From abdul at gci.net Mon May 9 22:43:11 2005 From: abdul at gci.net (Abdul) Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 12:43:11 -0800 Subject: [spambayes-dev] spam bayes Message-ID: <000a01c554d7$b79d0530$bd76ed18@Salafi> How do I set the SpamBayes to collect my pop3 email? Is there any way to set it up so that I can do this "web based"? I deeply appreciate the help. Sincerely, Brenna Arthur abdul at gci.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050509/a488e1f5/attachment.htm From binworkers at dcemail.com Wed May 11 14:52:24 2005 From: binworkers at dcemail.com (Big) Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 05:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [spambayes-dev] outlook plugin compilation on win32 Message-ID: <20050511125226.319463949@sitemail.everyone.net> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050511/8b7b3862/attachment.ksh From tameyer at ihug.co.nz Thu May 12 01:43:31 2005 From: tameyer at ihug.co.nz (Tony Meyer) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 11:43:31 +1200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] outlook plugin compilation on win32 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > While compiling outlook plugin dll in directory > windows/py2exe/ on windows system(tried win98/winxp), python > setup_all.py failed with these error: It's a warning, not an error. [...] > The following modules appear to be missing > ['BTrees.OOBTree', 'Crypto.Cipher', 'DateTime', 'Entrian', > 'OpenSSL', 'ZEO.ClientStorage', 'ZODB', 'ZODB.FileStorage', > 'bsddb185', 'bsddb3', 'gdbm', 'jarray', > 'java.io.IOException', 'java.io.InterruptedIOException', > 'java.net', 'mx.DateTime', 'persistent', 'psycopg', > 'pywin.dialogs', 'pywin.dialogs.list', 'resource', > 'transaction'] Btrees.OOBTree, ZEO.ClientStorage, ZODB, ZODB.FileStorage and transaction (and resource?) are all part of ZODB. If you install ZODB those warnings will go away. If you don't, then the binaries will still work, but you won't be able to use the (experimental) ZODBStorage and ZEOStorage classes. bsddb185, and bsddb3 aren't necessary if you have bsddb (e.g. with Python 2.3 or above). gdbm is only necessary if you want the binaries to be able to use it as a storage method. AFAIK it's pretty rare for anyone outside of *nix to use gdbm. pywin.dialogs and pywin.dialogs.list are not needed. psycopg is only necessary if you want the binaries to be able to use postgresql as a storage method. DateTime and mx.DateTime are not references in the spambayes source. I think that MySQLdb uses them, which is how they get into this list. I suspect that they aren't needed if the datetime module is available (Python 2.3? 2.4?). IAC, you shouldn't need them, and don't if you don't plan on using the MySQLStorage class. Crypto.Cypher, OpenSSL, Java.* and jarray are not referenced in the spambayes source. I think that they are by twisted, which is how they get into this list. IAC, you don't need them. Entrian isn't needed (it's referenced in the PyMeld code but is only there for debugging). > seems like its ask for too much module needed install, > On spambayes project site not mention this thing.. The README-DEVEL.txt file describes everything that is needed to build the binaries. If you really want to remove the unnecessary warnings (e.g. Entrian, pywin.*), you can edit the setup_all.py file. Feel free to submit a patch. =Tony.Meyer From N.F.Brooks at exeter.ac.uk Fri May 13 16:00:00 2005 From: N.F.Brooks at exeter.ac.uk (Neil Brooks) Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 15:00:00 +0100 Subject: [spambayes-dev] 1.1a1: Lost IMAP INBOX during testing Message-ID: Hi, I installed 1.a1 over the top of 1.0.3 from the source zip. After getting the working version of Version.py from the CVS, I was able to start Spambayes using my old cmd file that contains: python sb_imapfilter.py -c -t -v -l 10 -e y -P After running through the training folders and my INBOX to classify messages, it stopped with the error "cannot EXPUNGE in AUTH mode" (or something similar). At this point, my INBOX may have got partially deleted. But it may have happened after I re-ran Spambayes and got the message "The command 'Cannot find saved message' failed to give an OK response." Sorry to be a bit vague but I didn't notice the loss of 3000 messages until the next day. (They hadn't been moved to the unsure or spam folder; I recovered them from a backup so no big deal). I can't identify any changes to my normal usage of spambayes and my e-mail client (Mulberry). My client may have checked for new mail when the spambayes scan was being run but this would have happened in the past with 1.0.3. This is the 1st time I have had such a failure and it is worrying that someone less experienced than myself could get caught out naively running alpha software. Once I've made a copy of my INBOX, I may do some more testing! Neil -- Neil Brooks Small Systems Team Leader IT Services University of Exeter Tel: +44 (0)1392 26 3923 From fctr at nac.net Mon May 16 18:45:58 2005 From: fctr at nac.net (From Concept To Reality, L.L.C.) Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 12:45:58 -0400 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Training Question Message-ID: <20050516164602.7AC521E400E@bag.python.org> Greetings one and all: At what point is SPAMBayes sufficiently trained? Clarification: Ham cutoff: 0.2 Spam cutoff: 0.65 Mine the received headers: Yes Replace non-ascii characters: Yes Summarise email prefixes: Yes Summarise email suffixes: Yes Train when filtering: Yes Total emails trained: Spam: 7338 Ham: 1917 Using these settings, HAM have NEVER gone to UNSURE or SPAM, however, if I get 10 e-mails, with 1 as HAM, and 9 as SPAM, 3 SPAM end up in SPAM, 3 SPAM end up in UNSURE, and 3 SPAM end up in HAM. What's going on, here? Do I need to adjust my settings more, or do I need to train more? Sincerely, Andrew Burns +=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+ | From Concept To Reality, LLC. | | (fctr at nac.net) | | http://users.nac.net/fctr | +=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+ | Voice: (908) 879-3274 | | FAX: (908) 879-3275 | +=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+ From popiel at wolfskeep.com Mon May 16 20:31:47 2005 From: popiel at wolfskeep.com (T. Alexander Popiel) Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 11:31:47 -0700 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Training Question In-Reply-To: Message from "From Concept To Reality, L.L.C." of "Mon, 16 May 2005 12:45:58 EDT." <20050516164602.7AC521E400E@bag.python.org> References: <20050516164602.7AC521E400E@bag.python.org> Message-ID: <20050516183147.14B8D2DDC0@cashew.wolfskeep.com> In message: <20050516164602.7AC521E400E at bag.python.org> "From Concept To Reality, L.L.C." writes: >Greetings one and all: > >At what point is SPAMBayes sufficiently trained? Spambayes is sufficiently trained when you are satisfied with its performance. ;-) Really, there is no absolute rule, particularly since everyone's email is different. [ settings snipped ] > >Using these settings, HAM have NEVER gone to UNSURE or SPAM, >however, if I get 10 e-mails, with 1 as HAM, and 9 as SPAM, 3 SPAM >end up in SPAM, 3 SPAM end up in UNSURE, and 3 SPAM end up in HAM. First, spambayes tends to work better when trained with similar amounts of spam and ham; you've currently got about a 4:1 ratio. I'd suggest retraining with closer to a 1:1 ratio, and turning off training while filtering (which will tend to drive you towards severely unbalanced training). Second, you may want to lower both your ham and spam thresholds; if all your ham is being solidly classified as such, you may be able to get by with a ham threshold of .1, or even .05. Similarly, you may be able to drop the spam threshold to .51 or lower, though lower runs into the problem that a mail with only novel tokens (scoring at .5, since spambayes doesn't know anything about it) will end up in the spam bucket. >What's going on, here? Do I need to adjust my settings more, or do >I need to train more? Oddly enough, you may need to train _less_, and preserve a better training balance between spam and ham. - Alex From tameyer at ihug.co.nz Tue May 17 03:36:37 2005 From: tameyer at ihug.co.nz (Tony Meyer) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:36:37 +1200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Training Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: [Andrew] >> At what point is SPAMBayes sufficiently trained? [Alex] > First, spambayes tends to work better when trained with > similar amounts of spam and ham; you've currently got about a > 4:1 ratio. I'd suggest retraining with closer to a 1:1 ratio, > and turning off training while filtering (which will tend to > drive you towards severely unbalanced training). If you've got plenty of time to spend on this, you could figure out a way to use Skip's tte.py script (in contrib/ in the source) with your setup (sb_server, from memory). This enforces a 1::1 ratio, and also reduces the number of messages trained on. You can get SpamBayes to keep the cached messages around by increasing the cache expiry times. You'd want to still use the review pages to correct any misclassifications, so I guess you'd have to modify the source (sb_server.py, ProxyUI.py or Corpus.py probably) to not actually train when you do that (just move the message). Then you'd have two directories of classified messages that you could periodically give to tte.py* to build a database. * I don't recall if tte.py wants directories of individual messages or a mbox of messages. No doubt it could be modified to work either way. =Tony.Meyer From bigmax at bigmax.org Tue May 17 20:08:20 2005 From: bigmax at bigmax.org (Big Max) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 20:08:20 +0200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] address book Message-ID: <004b01c55b0b$692ad5f0$6400a8c0@BIGORDI> Spambayes does not pay attention to my address book email addresses and mark as spam mail that should not as they come from friends. How can I train Spambayes to accept as Ham all emails coming from anybody in my address book ? I tried .. but could not find. thank you -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050517/2583d42c/attachment.htm From skip at pobox.com Tue May 17 20:37:06 2005 From: skip at pobox.com (Skip Montanaro) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:37:06 -0500 Subject: [spambayes-dev] address book In-Reply-To: <004b01c55b0b$692ad5f0$6400a8c0@BIGORDI> References: <004b01c55b0b$692ad5f0$6400a8c0@BIGORDI> Message-ID: <17034.14802.60110.448758@montanaro.dyndns.org> >> Spambayes does not pay attention to my address book email addresses >> and mark as spam mail that should not as they come from friends. How >> can I train Spambayes to accept as Ham all emails coming from anybody >> in my address book ? I tried .. but could not find. Check the FAQ: http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/faq.html#why-don-t-you-add-whitelisting-blacklisting-to-spambayes Skip From ben at broughtongroup.com Wed May 18 00:55:38 2005 From: ben at broughtongroup.com (SpamBaynes Local Host) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 18:55:38 -0400 Subject: [spambayes-dev] OE localhost question Message-ID: <000001c55b33$f11d34d0$0300a8c0@DellDesk28> Please give simple instructions on how to set up Outlook Express to receive mail from localhost. I assume you go to Tools/Accounts/Mail/Add. Do the incoming (pop3) and outgoing (stmp) boxes both get filled with "localhost"? Fill in user Incoming Mail Server Account Name and Password for the "real" isp? Then go back to the Mail tab and set the new account as default. Am I missing anything, or totally screw up and need to go somewhere other than accounts. Thanks, Ben Broughton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050517/f0de3a24/attachment.html From seionage at lycos.com Wed May 18 14:26:19 2005 From: seionage at lycos.com (Sam Nage) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 06:26:19 -0600 Subject: [spambayes-dev] chi2 technique Message-ID: <20050518122619.D81D286B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Hi, I'm trying to understand how you implemented the Chi2 technique. Unfortunately it's been over 10yrs since my college stats class. I've done some refresher reading on chi2, and now sorta remember it. ;-) Unfortunately, I also don't know python, but am struggling through it. Can someone tell me how chi2 method is implemented in spambayes? I keep reading G.R.'s paper, but keep getting lost between the paper and the code implementation. Sorry for sounding like such a noob. I'm still going through the source. Has this been discussed before? I've tried searching the archives. TIA. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From tameyer at ihug.co.nz Thu May 19 00:51:04 2005 From: tameyer at ihug.co.nz (Tony Meyer) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:51:04 +1200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] chi2 technique In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > I'm trying to understand how you implemented the Chi2 > technique. Do you mean the whole classifier, or just the inverse-chi-squared function (chi2.chi2Q())? > Can someone tell me how chi2 method is implemented in spambayes? What exactly do you mean by how it's implemented? Do you want an explanation of how the math works (Gary Robinson's Linux Journal paper is probably best for that), or how the math was turned into Python? If the latter, then reading classifier.py is probably the best thing to do. Concentrate on the Classifier class, particularly the chi2_spamprob() and probability() methods. If you understand how they work (and the comments do a pretty good job of explaining how they relate to the math), then that's mostly it. If there's something you don't understand, then asking about the specific part of the code would probably make it easier to answer. > Has this been discussed before? I've tried searching the archives. Well, I'm sure people discussed it at the time it was written (when it replaced the earlier combining methods). That's long before this spambayes-dev list started, though. It might be at the start of the spambayes at python.org list, but I suspect you'll have to go back to when spambayes was discussed on python-dev. I wouldn't really recommend the archives as a place to find these answers. =Tony.Meyer From seionage at lycos.com Thu May 19 05:55:21 2005 From: seionage at lycos.com (Sam Nage) Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:55:21 -0600 Subject: [spambayes-dev] chi2 technique Message-ID: <20050519035521.10F4786B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Hi Tony, Thanks a bunch for the reply. I'll come up with more specific questions about the classifier. If they are too generic, don't worry about hurting my feeling about smart remarks. I know what it is like when you have a noob at the other end of the list. ;-) btw, I've got 2 suggestions about trying out, to see how they work (hopefully i'm not overstepping my bounds here) 1) Has anyone tried classifing, or keeping track of unknown HTML tag names? Say for instance, some spam has the following html V
I
G
R
A What if a token was added named "Unknown:Html" or something like that (because of the tags ? also, I ran across this link today: 2) http://mmmservices.web.cern.ch/mmmservices/AntiSpam/ Basically they filter out the really small fonts between individual characters (look at evolution 3) Would a technique like this be benneficial? Also, if I want to test some type of technique, what levels of spam filtering/fp/fn are people getting? What percentage points should I shoot for? TIA! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Meyer" To: "'Sam Nage'" , spambayes-dev at python.org Subject: RE: [spambayes-dev] chi2 technique Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:51:04 +1200 > > > I'm trying to understand how you implemented the Chi2 technique. > > Do you mean the whole classifier, or just the inverse-chi-squared function > (chi2.chi2Q())? > > > Can someone tell me how chi2 method is implemented in spambayes? > > What exactly do you mean by how it's implemented? Do you want an > explanation of how the math works (Gary Robinson's Linux Journal paper is > probably best for that), or how the math was turned into Python? > > If the latter, then reading classifier.py is probably the best thing to do. > Concentrate on the Classifier class, particularly the chi2_spamprob() and > probability() methods. If you understand how they work (and the comments do > a pretty good job of explaining how they relate to the math), then that's > mostly it. > > If there's something you don't understand, then asking about the specific > part of the code would probably make it easier to answer. > > > Has this been discussed before? I've tried searching the archives. > > Well, I'm sure people discussed it at the time it was written (when it > replaced the earlier combining methods). That's long before this > spambayes-dev list started, though. It might be at the start of the > spambayes at python.org list, but I suspect you'll have to go back to when > spambayes was discussed on python-dev. I wouldn't really recommend the > archives as a place to find these answers. > > =Tony.Meyer -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From matt at mondoinfo.com Thu May 19 17:52:04 2005 From: matt at mondoinfo.com (Matthew Dixon Cowles) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:52:04 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [spambayes-dev] chi2 technique In-Reply-To: <20050519035521.10F4786B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20050519035521.10F4786B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <1116517415.1.1053@mint-julep.mondoinfo.com> Dear Sam, > Also, if I want to test some type of technique, what levels of spam > filtering/fp/fn are people getting? What percentage points should I > shoot for? One reason that improving SpamBayes is hard is that it already does such a good job. I have mine_received_headers turned on and I've added a patch that tokenizes the IP addresses that URLs point to. On my mail, I get a false-negative rate that's under 0.5%. The false-positive rate that I get is much lower than that. Regards, Matt From tomj at id-company.net Thu May 19 18:15:12 2005 From: tomj at id-company.net (tomj@id-company.net) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 11:15:12 -0500 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Suggestion for feature: If user is in CONTACTS, do not categorize as SPAM Message-ID: <20050519161520.485581E4021@bag.python.org> This would make the filter more accurate. Perhaps combined with a %confidence level if there is a match. Just a though. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050519/11162e4a/attachment.html From tameyer at ihug.co.nz Fri May 20 01:04:37 2005 From: tameyer at ihug.co.nz (Tony Meyer) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 11:04:37 +1200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] chi2 technique In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > 1) Has anyone tried classifing, or keeping track of unknown > HTML tag names? Say for instance, some spam has the following > html V
I
G
R
A > What if a token was added named "Unknown:Html" or something > like that (because of the tags ? At the moment we basically throw all HTML tags away - the above would result in a "VIGRA" tag, which would probably be pretty spammy (those with legitimate mail about viagra would probably spell it correctly). You could try doing this if you liked. You'd have to have a list of all 'valid' or 'known' HTML tags, of course. I suspect that spammers that break up text like this use valid tags anyway (e.g. 'cat'), so it wouldn't have much effect. The only way to know is to test, though! > also, I ran across this link today: > > 2) http://mmmservices.web.cern.ch/mmmservices/AntiSpam/ > Basically they filter out the really small fonts between > individual characters (look at evolution 3) > Would a technique like this be benneficial? Test it, and you'll know <0.5 wink>. Once you start going down this road, though (converting to 'eye space'), it'll be hard to stop, and you'll be essentially writing a mail client. It's possible that these techniques result in more spammy clues, anyway (who gets munged text like that in legitimate mail?) - or at least if the exact token hasn't been seen before, the word will be ignored, which tends towards more unsure mail than more ham. > Also, if I want to test some type of technique, what levels > of spam filtering/fp/fn are people getting? What percentage > points should I shoot for? What you should be aiming for is to decrease whatever fp/fn/unsures you get without the patch. It doesn't really matter what you were getting before, just that things improve. If you find something that does improve results, then post the patch & your results here, and try and convince other people to try it out on their corpora - you'll probably get at least one taker. If results improve (from whatever to whatever) for several people, then there's a good chance that we'll add it in (probably as an experimental option) for the next release. If it really seems like it works for most people, then it can become a 'real' option, and possibly one day be on by default. =Tony.Meyer From jepler at unpythonic.net Sat May 21 18:10:13 2005 From: jepler at unpythonic.net (Jeff Epler) Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 11:10:13 -0500 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Suggestion for feature: If user is in CONTACTS, do not categorize as SPAM In-Reply-To: <20050519161520.485581E4021@bag.python.org> References: <20050519161520.485581E4021@bag.python.org> Message-ID: <20050521161012.GB8920@unpythonic.net> http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/faq.html#why-don-t-you-add-whitelisting-blacklisting-to-spambayes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050521/5161f412/attachment.pgp From skip at pobox.com Mon May 23 15:26:58 2005 From: skip at pobox.com (Skip Montanaro) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 08:26:58 -0500 Subject: [spambayes-dev] [Spambayes-checkins] website related.ht, 1.15, 1.16 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17041.55842.910955.146894@montanaro.dyndns.org> Anthony> Log Message: Anthony> wecanstopspam is a spam site now (ironically) ... Anthony> -
  • Gary Robinson has a well-organized Anthony> - Spam Wiki. Anthony> -
    • Any idea what happened? Skip From andy-spambayes at portmacc.net Mon May 23 17:58:56 2005 From: andy-spambayes at portmacc.net (Andy Holt) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:58:56 +0100 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Been trying out 1.1a for a while - toolbar 'funny' ? Message-ID: <000b01c55fb0$541fa510$c103280a@eu.cp.net> Hi, I've been trying out 1.1a - the Outlook plug-in. All's going well. A question: has the text of the button labels changed from, er, whatever it was, to just 'Spam' and 'Not Spam'? If so, there's a minor issue. I've been running 1.1a for weeks, but my toolbar buttons have had the same, longer text as they always had, until just today when I was trying to track down an Outlook problem. I disabled all my add-ins, and when I came to re-enable Spambayes, that's when I noticed the new button labels. So, it seems you have to actually disable and re-enable Spambayes for the new labels to show. When I installed 1.1a originally, I just closed Outlook, installed 1.1a over the previous version (1.0.4 I think), and restarted Outlook. This is minor, but might it actually be showing up the fact that some other things that have changed between 1.0.x and 1.1 do not work (or something) until you disable and then re-enable the add-in? cheers Andy Holt From kenny.pitt at gmail.com Mon May 23 19:12:48 2005 From: kenny.pitt at gmail.com (Kenny Pitt) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 13:12:48 -0400 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Been trying out 1.1a for a while - toolbar 'funny' ? In-Reply-To: <000b01c55fb0$541fa510$c103280a@eu.cp.net> Message-ID: <42920f11.440cce81.1ad0.5e68@mx.gmail.com> Andy Holt wrote: > Hi, I've been trying out 1.1a - the Outlook plug-in. All's going > well. Great! Some problems are expected in an alpha release like this, but it is encouraging to know that it seems to be working well in general. > A question: has the text of the button labels changed from, er, > whatever it was, to just 'Spam' and 'Not Spam'? Yes, it has. The old labels took up more space than necessary, and the wording was a little confusing in certain contexts. > If so, there's a > minor issue. I've been running 1.1a for weeks, but my toolbar > buttons have had the same, longer text as they always had, until just > today when I was trying to track down an Outlook problem. I disabled > all my add-ins, and when I came to re-enable Spambayes, that's when I > noticed the new button labels. So, it seems you have to actually > disable and re-enable Spambayes for the new labels to show. When I > installed 1.1a originally, I just closed Outlook, installed 1.1a over > the previous version (1.0.4 I think), and restarted Outlook. SpamBayes first tries to use the existing toolbar so that any customizations you have made to it will be preserved. If, for any reason, it can't access the existing toolbar then it will recreate it from scratch. This is probably what happened after you disabled and then re-enabled SpamBayes. > This is minor, but might it actually be showing up the fact that some > other things that have changed between 1.0.x and 1.1 do not work (or > something) until you disable and then re-enable the add-in? I expect that this is unique to the toolbar because of the special behavior for creating it, but we'll keep an eye out just in case. Thanks for the input! -- Kenny Pitt From anthony at interlink.com.au Mon May 23 19:53:11 2005 From: anthony at interlink.com.au (Anthony Baxter) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 03:53:11 +1000 Subject: [spambayes-dev] [Spambayes-checkins] website related.ht, 1.15, 1.16 In-Reply-To: <17041.55842.910955.146894@montanaro.dyndns.org> References: <17041.55842.910955.146894@montanaro.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <200505240353.14113.anthony@interlink.com.au> On Monday 23 May 2005 23:26, Skip Montanaro wrote: > Anthony> Log Message: > Anthony> wecanstopspam is a spam site now (ironically) > > ... > > Anthony> -
  • Gary Robinson has a well-organized > Anthony> - href="http://wecanstopspam.org/jsp/Wiki?StartingPoints">Spam Wiki. > Anthony> -
    • > > Any idea what happened? Presumably the domain name expired, and a spammer grabbed it to capitalise on the existing links to the site (higher google pagerank). -- Anthony Baxter It's never too late to have a happy childhood. From andy-spambayes at portmacc.net Mon May 23 23:38:16 2005 From: andy-spambayes at portmacc.net (Andy Holt) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 22:38:16 +0100 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Been trying out 1.1a for a while - toolbar 'funny' ? In-Reply-To: <42920f11.440cce81.1ad0.5e68@mx.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002101c55fdf$bb796cd0$c103280a@eu.cp.net> Hi Kenny, thanks for the reply. That all makes sense, thanks, so SB's doing its (correct) thing. I wonder if we should mention this behaviour in a FAQ or help page somewhere - obviously I thoroughly read everything I could before asking my question.... ;-) Actually this FAQ (http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/faq.html#the-recover-from-spam-button-no-longer-appears - URL wrap alert!) may need tweaking because some people will have the 'Not Spam' button and some will still have the old 'Recover from Spam' button (I remember the old wording now) even if they've upgraded to 1.1. Surprisingly, I couldn't find any other places where the precise text on the labels is mentioned, so no large re-write required, but something to at least flag this as normal behaviour would be a good idea. Many thanks. Andy | -----Original Message----- | From: Kenny Pitt [mailto:kenny.pitt at gmail.com] | Sent: 23 May 2005 18:13 | To: 'Andy Holt'; spambayes-dev at python.org | Subject: RE: [spambayes-dev] Been trying out 1.1a for a while | - toolbar 'funny' ? | | | Andy Holt wrote: | > Hi, I've been trying out 1.1a - the Outlook plug-in. All's going | > well. | | Great! ............ From camel at rocam.com Tue May 24 16:08:00 2005 From: camel at rocam.com (Erwin Tschirk) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 16:08:00 +0200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] ham goes not left to the original folder - Outlook 2003 Message-ID: <20050524140845.46CA51E4002@bag.python.org> ham goes not left to the original folder - Outlook 2003.... My original folder is (IMAP) inbox Then after spam-filtering it goes to folder "SPAM" Bu then i go to folder "SPAM" -> take one of this mails and click an NOT SPAM"-icon Then the programm move it to thew lokal INBOX - and not to the IMAP-inbox folder. Do somebody know a solution for it ? Cu erwin From tameyer at ihug.co.nz Wed May 25 01:37:33 2005 From: tameyer at ihug.co.nz (Tony Meyer) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 11:37:33 +1200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Been trying out 1.1a for a while - toolbar'funny' ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Actually this FAQ > (http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/faq.html#the-recover-from-sp > am-button-no-longer-appears - URL wrap alert!) may need tweaking > because some people will have the 'Not Spam' button and some will > still have the old 'Recover from Spam' button (I remember the old > wording now) even if they've upgraded to 1.1. I wondered about this. What I'm doing for the moment with the FAQ is using 1.0.x wording everywhere. Once 1.1 is final, I'll update the various places in the FAQ that refer to 1.0.x specific things. If someone has a better plan (that doesn't involve more work!) I'd be happy to hear it. =Tony.Meyer From tameyer at ihug.co.nz Wed May 25 01:43:09 2005 From: tameyer at ihug.co.nz (Tony Meyer) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 11:43:09 +1200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Been trying out 1.1a for a while - toolbar'funny' ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: [Andy Holt] >> If so, there's a minor issue. I've been running 1.1a for weeks, but my >> toolbar buttons have had the same, longer text as they always had, until >> just today when I was trying to track down an Outlook problem. I disabled >> all my add-ins, and when I came to re-enable Spambayes, that's when I >> noticed the new button labels. So, it seems you have to actually disable >> and re-enable Spambayes for the new labels to show. When I installed 1.1a >> originally, I just closed Outlook, installed 1.1a over the previous >> version (1.0.4 I think), and restarted Outlook. [Kenny Pitt] > SpamBayes first tries to use the existing toolbar so that any > customizations you have made to it will be preserved. If, > for any reason, it can't access the existing toolbar then it > will recreate it from scratch. This is probably what > happened after you disabled and then re-enabled SpamBayes. I had wondered about this a few times, but figured it wasn't that important. I didn't realise that there was anyone that managed to keep the toolbar alive (i.e. doesn't have the "recreating the toolbar" log entries) between sessions <0.5 wink>. This is tied up with removing the toolbar on uninstall, too (which I would like to get done for 1.1). For now, I've added a note about it in the release notes (which people probably don't read, but it's a start, at least). I guess we could add a check for the old buttons and if they are found recreate the toolbar (since we have all the recreation code there already). Anyone want to open a feature request? =Tony.Meyer From dreas at emailaccount.nl Tue May 31 08:44:21 2005 From: dreas at emailaccount.nl (Dreas van Donselaar) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 08:44:21 +0200 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Paid programmer needed :) Message-ID: Hi all, We are building a commercial antispam application (free for personal use though) based on SpamBayes. We are currently looking for a Python programmer with SpamBayes experience, to assist us in developing our software further. We are definately not just a copy, and have a different model. So far however people without too much SpamBayes experience managed to either break the cleanliness of the code or rewrite functionality that was already there. We are trying to avoid this :) Please contact me on an IM when interested! MSN: dreas at emailaccount.nl AIM: dreas1983 Y!: dreasvandonselaar Skype: dreasvandonselaar ICQ: 108756 Regards, ___ Dreas van Donselaar CIO & co-founder SpamExperts Postbus 309 6200 AH Maastricht The Netherlands T: +31 (0)626202808 F: +31 (0)842203930 E: aj.vandonselaar at spamexperts.com W: http://www.spamexperts.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/attachments/20050531/1186ac89/attachment.htm