Mailman 3 November 2004 - spambayes-dev

Cannot find saved message
by Thomas Heller Jan. 18, 2005

Jan. 18, 2005

>From time to time, I'm getting this traceback, in the sb_imapfilter: Training Training ham folder INBOX.spambayes.train_ham .................................... 0 trained. Training spam folder INBOX.spambayes.train_spam ................................................................................ ................. 0 trained. Training took 0.4400 seconds, 0 messages were trained. Classifying ....***************************************.Traceback (most recent call last): File "sb_imapfilter.py", line 1040, in ? run() File "sb_imapfilter.py", line 1024, in run imap_filter.Filter() File "sb_imapfilter.py", line 892, in Filter self.unsure_folder, self.ham_folder) File "sb_imapfilter.py", line 788, in Filter msg.Save() File "sb_imapfilter.py", line 559, in Save raise BadIMAPResponseError("Cannot find saved message", "") BadIMAPResponseError: The command 'Cannot find saved message' failed to give an OK response. > c:\sf\spambayes\scripts\sb_imapfilter.py(559)Save() -> raise BadIMAPResponseError("Cannot find saved message", "") (Pdb) Does anyone have a solution to this, before I examine this further? Thanks, Thomas

2 3

Download verification checking request
by Tony Meyer Nov. 30, 2004

Nov. 30, 2004

As per [ 1061119 ] Provide verification and/or security measures for downloads <http://sf.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498106&aid=1061119&group_id=61702> the 1.0.1 release (and future releases) includes some measures to try and let people confirm that their download is valid. Specifically, the file sizes and MD5 checksums are listed on the download page: <http://spambayes.org/download.html> and there are PGP signatures for each of the three files, signed by the release manager (me, for this one). I'm pretty new to this stuff - I'm pretty sure that the MD5s and sizes are correct, but not 100% about the signatures. If someone familiar with this stuff could use the signatures to verify the files, and let me know (either here or via the tracker above) so that I know I've done the process correctly, that would be fantastic. Thanks! =Tony.Meyer -- Please always include the list (spambayes(a)python.org) in your replies (reply-all), and please don't send me personal mail about SpamBayes. http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tameyer/writing/reply_all.html explains this.

3 2

RE: [spambayes-dev] Re: [Spambayes] Download verification checking request
by Tony Meyer Nov. 30, 2004

Nov. 30, 2004

> Suggestions: Thanks :) > Use an ascii sig (gpg -ba) Done. > Put the sig files on the website directly, they're too small > to justify putting in the Files section. Done. > Put your key id on the download page - that way people can > more easily fetch it from the keyservers. Done. I swapped to GnuPG, too, because using the command line was just so much easier than using the GUI PGP. I've added instructions about doing this to README-DEVEL.txt, so hopefully it should all go smoothly next time :) =Tony.Meyer

1 0

RE: [Spambayes] spambayes and kmail
by Tony Meyer Nov. 29, 2004

Nov. 29, 2004

> This is all pretty damn cool, in my opinion... Agreed :) [...] > (although, obviously without the nice admin > GUI - perhaps it would be worth writing code to generate a prefs GUI > using different toolkits? There's code in shtoom that does this that > could be lifted... I'm interested in this. One thing I'd really like to have for 1.1 is a prefs GUI (for me, I'm thinking about sb_pop3dnd and sb_imapfilter in particular, but the code should be able to handle whatever set of options). I was thinking about putting something together based on the dialog code that Outlook uses, but a non-win32-specific solution would be much better. If I download shtoom, will it be pretty simple to find the relevant code to have a look at it? =Tony.Meyer

1 0

RE: [spambayes-dev] small bugs
by Tony Meyer Nov. 29, 2004

Nov. 29, 2004

> I found some slight bugs on sb_server. > > o Subjects in clues/tokens table aren't cgi.escape()'d so > cause xmllib.Error. Fixed in CVS head. I'll backport this for 1.0.2 at some point. > o Messages containing only header part and no CRLF separator > (maybe broken, unsuccessful spam etc.) aren't filtered. Fixed in CVS head. This changes behaviour somewhat, so I'm reluctant to backport, but the fix will appear in 1.1. Thanks! =Tony.Meyer

1 0

small bugs
by Hatuka*nezumi Nov. 27, 2004

Nov. 27, 2004

I found some slight bugs on sb_server. o Subjects in clues/tokens table aren't cgi.escape()'d so cause xmllib.Error. o Messages containing only header part and no CRLF separator (maybe broken, unsuccessful spam etc.) aren't filtered. --- nezumi

1 0

RE: [spambayes-dev] Incorrect Outlook stats
by Tony Meyer Nov. 25, 2004

Nov. 25, 2004

> I'll work up something and see how it goes :) I've checked in changes to use the spambayes.message MessageInfo classes rather than the custom Outlook one (it should all be seemlessly backwards compatible). The test script still runs as it did before, and using the plug-in still appears to work here. The next step is to store more than just the training data, but that's pretty simple now. I may not get to that until next week, though. Then I can fix the stats problem etc :) Let me know if you experience any troubles after the next time you CVS up :) =Tony.Meyer

1 0

ANNOUNCE: SpamBayes release 1.0.1
by Tony Meyer Nov. 25, 2004

Nov. 25, 2004

The SpamBayes team is pleased to announce release 1.0.1 of SpamBayes. As is now usual, this is both a release of the source code and of an installation program for all Microsoft Windows users. This is a bug-fix release that fixes a number of minor issues with the 1.0 release, but includes no new functionality, and is entirely compatible with the 1.0 release. A 1.1a1 release, including many new features, will probably be released early in the new year. Details about the bugs that have been fixed in this release can be found at https://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?release_id=285346 You can get the release via the 'Download' page at http://spambayes.org/download.html Enjoy the new release and your spam-free mailbox :-) As always, thanks to everyone involved in this release. Tony. (on behalf of the SpamBayes team) --- What is SpamBayes? --- The SpamBayes project is working on developing a Bayesian (of sorts) anti-spam filter (in Python), initially based on the work of Paul Graham, but since modified with ideas from Robinson, Peters, et al. The project includes a number of different applications, all using the same core code, ranging from a plug-in for Microsoft Outlook, to a POP3 proxy, to various command-line tools. The Windows installation program will install either the Outlook add-in (for Microsoft Outlook users), or the SpamBayes server program (for all other POP3 mail client users, including Microsoft Outlook Express). All Windows users (including existing users of the Outlook add-in) are encouraged to use the installation program. If you wish to use the source-code version, you will also need to install Python - see README.txt in the source tree for more information.

1 0

RE: [spambayes-dev] Is building with Python 2.4 and not Python 2.3 a bugfix?
by Tony Meyer Nov. 25, 2004

Nov. 25, 2004

> > So my question is: is building with the newer Python valid > > for a bugfix release? > > It fixes bugs, right? (like "the end of problems with > malformed messages") Yes, although that's not the only thing it does. > Micro releases of Python on Windows sometimes ship with new external > libraries too, e.g., to fix Tk bugs, or to plug zlib "security holes". > This seems much the same. That's good enough precedent for me :) > There's a small chance that 2.4 will > introduce a relevant bug, and then the decision to use it would look > imprudent. In that case you'll be blamed. I can handle that. The chance is very small, I think, since I use 2.4 myself and haven't run anything (since fixing the initial problems). > But if all it does is improve email handling, nobody will praise you. I think it will be unnoticeably faster, too <wink>. > So there's the moral > dilemma: you can improve peoples' lives, or cover your ass. Since > it's not my ass, I vote you expose it <wink>. I have no fear. If it all goes to custard, then at least I can add that to the 'famous last words of spambayes developers' section on the website quotes page <wink>. So I'll do this - but I'll be prudent enough to wait for 2.4 final and not use 2.4rc1 for the release I'll do today... Thanks for the comments :) =Tony.Meyer

1 0

RE: [spambayes-dev] Incorrect Outlook stats
by Tony Meyer Nov. 24, 2004

Nov. 24, 2004

> > AFAICT the only way** to fix this would be to add more > > information to the message_db (a la the non-Outlook version). > > I believe we can do this in a backwards-compatible way, > > although there will be a reasonable number of changes, I suspect. > > Should I go ahead and do this? > > I was afraid that would be the case. I wouldn't be opposed > to adding an "original score" field to the message if that's > the easiest way, but I suspect that putting it into the > message db would be a better approach. Yes, I agree. > The decisions we make > about what stats to update would be controlled by both the > original classification and the training status of the > message, so it seems like it would be best to reset all of > this when the training data is reset. That would be much > easier to do in the message db than in the fields of the messages. In addition, there are sometimes problems with storing the field (Hotmail & IMAP particularly, I gather, neither of which I use with Outlook), and avoiding those would be good. It would make the code for the 'show clues' function a little simpler, IIRC. In the past I've wondered about storing the id for the original folder in there, too, to get around the problems that there are with that at times. We'd still want to have the field for display purposes, but could maybe limit it to that. I'll work up something and see how it goes :) =Tony.Meyer

1 0