Mailman 3 February 2004 - spambayes-dev

Re: spambayes/scripts ...
by Skip Montanaro Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

Tony> Let's call this 1.0a9, because 7+1 is a bad number, and that makes Tony> us match the Outlook plug-in. I must admit, I don't understand what makes 7+1 a bad number. Inside joke perhaps? Skip

2 1

RE: [spambayes-dev] New release
by Tony Meyer Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

[Mark] > Therefore, should > someone forge ahead and prepare a new source-code release, I > will jump ahead of where I am, and do a corresponding binary release. > > Not that I am pushing for this, but incase someone is waiting > for me, then I'm pretty ready to go. Unfortunately (ok ok, > fortunately) I have no idea what the source-release process > is, nor have any intention of learning now <wink> For the most part, it's documented in README-DEVEL.TXT, but I'm happy to put together a source-code release, if no-one else is clammering to do it (I waited all day for someone else to pipe up <wink>). If we put out release candidates tomorrow then people could try them over the weekend and we could release Monday. So, tomorrow (unless the mail when I get in suggests otherwise), I'll: 1. Sort out the -d/-D/-p stuff. It's looking like -p/-d is the winner (4-0). 2. Do another update to WHAT_IS_NEW.TXT and CHANGELOG.txt. 3. Have another look through the sb_server binary documentation. 4. Build a release candidate and post a link here. Mark - any chance that you want to revamp the Version.py stuff before we put things together? If you change Version.py and the plug-in, I can do the sb_server/imapfilter/pop3dnd scripts. What are we calling this, anyway? 1.0a8? 1.0b1? BTW, the binary release is meant to be built with OL2K, yes? (That means that I should remember not to do it :) =Tony Meyer

3 3

RE: [spambayes-dev] New release [Release candidate attached]
by Tony Meyer Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

> How about we call this 0.9, the next 1.0b1 (and b2 etc as > needed), then 1.0? Sounds good to me. A release candidate for the source can be found here: <http://tinyurl.com/3748u> (zip) <http://tinyurl.com/23lm4> (tgz) If people could give them a spin, that'd be great. (Especially the linux folk, since I've stuffed up the line endings before <0.5 wink>). =Tony Meyer

2 1

RE: [spambayes-dev] Preventing FAQ 3.13
by Tony Meyer Feb. 5, 2004

Feb. 5, 2004

[Eli] > Kenny Pitt wrote, as have many before: > > > This is covered by FAQ 3.13: > > <http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/faq.html#help-i-deleted-the-unsure-spam-fo lder > > Would it be possible to detect the error state resulting from > deleting the spam folder from within the plugin? Having a dialog > that pops up describing the problem and possible solutions (and perhaps > a few do-it-for-me buttons?) might cut down a fair bit of the support > questions that come through. At the risk of incurring the wrath of Mark <wink>, I've done the smallest possible thing to help out these people. Now, if the Spam/Unsure folder is deleted, rather than quietly failing to move the mail, it reports the error to the user, suggesting that this is what they may have done, and what to do about it. This doesn't prevent them doing it, or give them do-it-for-me buttons, but it's something. It also doesn't help those that have the Spam/Unsure folder in the Deleted Items folder, but haven't emptied it. =Tony Meyer

1 0

sb_mailsort.py problem
by Atom 'Smasher' Feb. 4, 2004

Feb. 4, 2004

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 using: 1.0a7 & sb_mailsort.py i got a spam that caused sb_mailsort.py to fart. i attached a copy, but i'm not sure if it'll go through, so i'll make it available here: http://smasher.suspicious.org/tmp/sb_problem.tgz for a few days/weeks. sb_problem.tgz md5: 3d8ee9c1e9c5baf683b55ebc131a10f3 i'm assuming that the non-ascii stuff caused the problem. i removed all identifying information from the email, which didn't change the way sb_mailsort.py choked on it. i'm not subscribed to this list, so please Cc me on any replies. footnote: this is on a box running FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE and python2.2.3 i tried upgrading to newer python when i first installed SB but that caused some bizarre problems and i kept the older version. thanks... ...atom _______________________________________________ PGP key - http://smasher.suspicious.org/pgp.txt 3EBE 2810 30AE 601D 54B2 4A90 9C28 0BBF 3D7D 41E3 ------------------------------------------------- "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Cheney, 26 August 2002 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAII8RnCgLvz19QeMRAuaDAJ4ici981Wb+P4qapavrl1xLEb8mYQCggRt2 RZmETdnoXBssV4F00uWOI+Y= =vSU3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

FW: [Spambayes] Standards for Filtering
by Tim Peters Feb. 3, 2004

Feb. 3, 2004

Over on the spambayes list, Yakov Shafranovich sent this, and later asked: Is there anyone who is willing to participate in a mailing list on filtering standards? Yakov, I'm forwarding this to the spambayes-dev(a)python.org list, because that's where the SpamBayes developers congregate. If you're going to send info about the mailing list (which is welcome!), please use mailto:spambayes-dev@python.org -----Original Message----- From: Yakov Shafranovich <research(a)solidmatrix.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 8:54 AM To: spambayes(a)python.org Subject: [Spambayes] Standards for Filtering Daniel Quinlan of SpamAssassin suggested that I should contact you. I co-chair the Anti-Spam Research Group (ASRG) of the IRTF [asrg.sp.am] together with John Levine. The ASRG does pre-standards work and research for the IETF. We have been thinking about different ways that standards can help the filtering community and what we currently have on the table is standard headers and dynamic filtering updates (like anti-virus programs do). We also have a subgroup for filtering work which is currently being formed (see http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/filtering.shtml). What I am wondering, is whether the filtering community can benefit from standards and if filtering folks are willing to discuss such standards, and cooperate with each other. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg <at> shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research <at> solidmatrix.com "I ate your Web page. / Forgive me. It was juicy / And tart on my tongue." (MIT's 404 Message) -------

3 2

New release
by Mark Hammond Feb. 3, 2004

Feb. 3, 2004

Just so everyone knows where I am at... I've been slightly distracted by distutils and releasing win32all (and pretending to have a life, and having trouble getting motivated to work at all, but that is a different story <wink>). The details aren't particularly interesting, but instead of doing another "WISE" based release, I'm going to jump straight to distutils, and therefore force myself to face the issues now rather than get 1/2 way through yet another thing. So, my plan was always to try and release a new win32all, *then* release a new spambayes binary. This way, anyone else can re-create the spambayes binary fairly easily, and for a change, public releases will synchronize *and* be easily reproducible. This is still my personal plan, but has no particular benefit. Therefore, should someone forge ahead and prepare a new source-code release, I will jump ahead of where I am, and do a corresponding binary release. Not that I am pushing for this, but incase someone is waiting for me, then I'm pretty ready to go. Unfortunately (ok ok, fortunately) I have no idea what the source-release process is, nor have any intention of learning now <wink> Mark.

1 0

Re: [spambayes-dev] -d/-D command line options
by T. Alexander Popiel Feb. 2, 2004

Feb. 2, 2004

In message: <1ED4ECF91CDED24C8D012BCF2B034F13026F2A75(a)its-xchg4.massey.ac.nz> "Tony Meyer" <ta-meyer(a)ihug.co.nz> writes: >3. -p <filename> for pickle, -d <filename> for dbm - Alex

2 1

-d/-D command line options
by Tony Meyer Feb. 2, 2004

Feb. 2, 2004

One other thing that I think would be good to sort out before the next release (we're still doing one, right? <wink>) is getting the -d/-D command line options consistent. We currently have: sb_xmlrpcserver: pickle: -p <filename> dbm : -p <filename> -d sb_server : pickle: -D <filename> dbm : -d <filename> sb_notesfilter : pickle: -d <filename> dbm : -D <filename> sb_mboxtrain : pickle: -D <filename> dbm : -d <filename> sb_imapfilter : pickle: -d <filename> dbm : -D <filename> sb_filter : pickle: -D <filename> dbm : -d <filename> sb_dbexpimp : pickle: -d <filename> dbm : -D <filename> So, ignoring the odd xmlrpcserver (the old hammie.py was like this, IIRC), we have 3 -D for pickle, and 3 That use -d for pIckle, it seeMS. The -D for pickle ones are more widely used, though. We also had a suggestion, though, that -d <filename> for dbm and -p <filename> for pickle would make more sense: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/spambayes-dev/2003-July/000438.html> So, what do people vote for? 1. -D <filename> for pickle, -d <filename> for dbm 2. -d <filename> for pickle, -D <filename> for dbm 3. -p <filename> for pickle, -d <filename> for dbm 4. The inconsistent status quo. [This would close: <https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=824628&group_i d=61702>] =Tony Meyer

2 1