From klaus at akpeters.com Wed Nov 19 15:26:48 2008 From: klaus at akpeters.com (Klaus Peters) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:26:48 -0500 Subject: [spambayes-dev] Delete as Spam Message-ID: I have been using SpamBayes for a while and recently I cannot move items from the suspect folder to the junk folder by clicking "delete as spam". This is different from the need to refresh, items simply don't move. If I close Outlook, the function works ONCE and them is back to not working. Klaus A K Peters. Ltd ., Publishers of Science & Technology 888 Worcester St., Suite 230 Wellesley, MA 02482-3717 +1 (781) 416-2888, ext. 10 / FAX: +1 (781) 416-2889 / Cell phone: +1 (508) 505-1521 Skype : klauspie P Please print only if you need a hard copy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From skip at pobox.com Fri Nov 28 16:54:32 2008 From: skip at pobox.com (skip at pobox.com) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:54:32 -0600 Subject: [spambayes-dev] SpamBayes Python 2.2 requirement, old, crufty code, ThunderBayes Message-ID: <18736.5176.453563.644562@montanaro-dyndns-org.local> I'm in favor of getting rid of the Python 2.2 compatibility. It just clutters up the code with a bunch of try/except statements. Is there realistically still a sizable enough population of SpamBayes users still stuck on Python 2.2? My inclination is to jump to compatibility with Python 2.4. Also, as I've been horsing around the past week or two trying to add some new functionality and clean up some stuff I noticed we have *a lot* of code squirreled away in subversion which is probably no longer used by anybody. I'm in favor of starting to dump unused code to reduce the maintenance overhead after we shove 1.1 (kicking and screaming) out the door. Finally, I'm planning on incorporating the ThunderBayes code into SpamBayes. It's no longer supported by the original author. He and I exchanged some emails awhile ago. He was fine with the idea. This would allow us to at least get a ThunderBayes version out there which uses SpamBayes 1.1. It would still be essentially unsupported unless and until we can scrounge up some bodies to actually maintain it. Still, unsupported ThunderBayes using SpamBayes 1.1 seems better to me than unsupported ThunderBayes using SpamBayes 1.0. Comments? Skip From popiel at wolfskeep.com Fri Nov 28 22:59:49 2008 From: popiel at wolfskeep.com (T. Alexander Popiel) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:59:49 -0800 Subject: [spambayes-dev] SpamBayes Python 2.2 requirement, old, crufty code, ThunderBayes In-Reply-To: <18736.5176.453563.644562@montanaro-dyndns-org.local> References: <18736.5176.453563.644562@montanaro-dyndns-org.local> Message-ID: <20081128215949.7CD952DDC1@cashew.wolfskeep.com> In message: <18736.5176.453563.644562 at montanaro-dyndns-org.local> skip at pobox.com writes: >I'm in favor of getting rid of the Python 2.2 compatibility. +1 As one of the original proponents for 2.2 compatibility, I say that its time is done. Dump it. Sure, I'm going to have to rewrite my nightly retraining code... but I've been needing to do that for, um, years. >Finally, I'm planning on incorporating the ThunderBayes code into SpamBayes. +0 - Alex From richie at entrian.com Sat Nov 29 15:16:18 2008 From: richie at entrian.com (Richie Hindle) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 14:16:18 +0000 Subject: [spambayes-dev] SpamBayes Python 2.2 requirement, old, crufty code, ThunderBayes In-Reply-To: <18736.5176.453563.644562@montanaro-dyndns-org.local> References: <18736.5176.453563.644562@montanaro-dyndns-org.local> Message-ID: <8a6ba1da0811290616o5f98edel90a47a663704bcc9@mail.gmail.com> [Skip] > I'm in favor of getting rid of the Python 2.2 compatibility. [...] > I'm in favor of starting to dump unused code [...] > I'm planning on incorporating the ThunderBayes code into SpamBayes. +1, +1, +1 > Comments? Just, many thanks for keeping things going... -- Richie Hindle richie at entrian.com