If we don't get some more Windows help pretty soon...
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty soon, I think it might be time to think about closing up shop. Other than the occasional, "Help! I deleted my Junk Suspects folder!" questions, the bulk of the problems reported here over the past year have related to the 64-bit Win7 environment. We really need to find some people who can help with this. If you have any ideas, please post them here. Thx, Skip
Hi Skip,
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty soon, I think it might be time to think about closing up shop.
I'm afraid I don't have either an available 64-bit Windows box or Outlook, so I can't help... sorry. -- Richie Hindle richie@entrian.com http://entrian.com/blog http://twitter.com/richiehindle
[Skip Montanaro]
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty soon, I think it might be time to think about closing up shop. Other than the occasional, "Help! I deleted my Junk Suspects folder!" questions, the bulk of the problems reported here over the past year have related to the 64-bit Win7 environment. We really need to find some people who can help with this.
If you have any ideas, please post them here.
I don't think we need to close up shop - we can only be straightforward about the state of it. "Sorry, at the time we have no developers able to work on that configuration". It's a FAQ, and pointing to that is all the response needed or possible. I know you like to be helpful, Skip, and have been _very_ helpful here since the start, and this is frustrating for all who like to help. But it is what it is, and capable Windows developers willing to work "for free" are mighty rare. The software continues to be of real value on many other platforms, right? Evolution in practice ;-) For me, I haven't used "my" project in years - I use gmail for almost all my email now. And I don't have any of {Win7, 64-bit, Outlook 2010} even I had time to dig into it. So I don't expect anything substantive here to change in the foreseeable future. But that's OK! Spambayes delivered remarkable value to countless thousands of users, and still does. If users of some popular WIndows configurations are out of luck for now, they should really blame Microsoft ;-)
On Fri, June 24, 2011 22:09, skip@pobox.com wrote:
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty soon, I think it might be time to think about closing up shop. Other than the occasional, "Help! I deleted my Junk Suspects folder!" questions, the bulk of the problems reported here over the past year have related to the 64-bit Win7 environment. We really need to find some people who can help with this.
If you have any ideas, please post them here.
What do you mean by closing shop? I would just add a notice on the website that SpamBayes is not compatible with Windows 7 64bit + Outlook 2010, and leave it at that. It works perfectly fine for my .procmailrc setup on Linux, and for many other configurations. It's open source anyway. Anyone can checkout the repo, write a patch, and ask for a pull (git terminology over here, I don't know which repo SpamBayes uses).
I gave up on spambayes. It was letting too much spam through. At one time, it was batting 100, but I guess the spammers got smarter or something. I'm using a gmail account now forwarded to a private (secret) inbox that my outlook pulls down. On Jun 29, 2011 4:04 AM, "Amedee Van Gasse" <amedee@vangasse.eu> wrote:
On Fri, June 24, 2011 22:09, skip@pobox.com wrote:
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty soon,
I
think it might be time to think about closing up shop. Other than the occasional, "Help! I deleted my Junk Suspects folder!" questions, the bulk of the problems reported here over the past year have related to the 64-bit Win7 environment. We really need to find some people who can help with this.
If you have any ideas, please post them here.
What do you mean by closing shop? I would just add a notice on the website that SpamBayes is not compatible with Windows 7 64bit + Outlook 2010, and leave it at that. It works perfectly fine for my .procmailrc setup on Linux, and for many other configurations.
It's open source anyway. Anyone can checkout the repo, write a patch, and ask for a pull (git terminology over here, I don't know which repo SpamBayes uses).
_______________________________________________ SpamBayes@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Info/Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
On 06/29/2011 6:08 AM, Erik Ohrnberger wrote:
I gave up on spambayes. It was letting too much spam through. At one time, it was batting 100, but I guess the spammers got smarter or something.
I'm using a gmail account now forwarded to a private (secret) inbox that my outlook pulls down.
As spammers change tactics, there may be a small window where new spam gets through, but that is quickly shut with a little training. SpamBayes still gets 95+% of spam coming into our network - impressive considering all the messages that only have an image embedded or contain many lines of hidden, gibberish text. Although it may be common knowledge here, I have never seen this mentioned. I tested sb_server on a Win7 Pro 64 bit system to see if it functioned. I can report the Windows1.1a6 binary installed and functioned quite well. If you want to run as a service you must do "runas administrator" when loading the command prompt box for issuing the "sb_service.exe -install" command; otherwise it is fairly standard. The only issue I had was when configuring via the web interface. It would save any changes, but always complained with the following: 500 Server error Traceback (most recent call last): File "spambayes\Dibbler.pyo", line 476, in found_terminator File "spambayes\UserInterface.pyo", line 883, in onChangeopts File "spambayes\ProxyUI.pyo", line 569, in reReadOptions File "sb_server.pyo", line 981, in _recreateState UnboundLocalError: local variable 'state' referenced before assignment Messages like these could scare away the timid, but they do not seem to hinder functionality. So, individuals who insist on using Outlook, could use sb_server like the rest of us, if SpamBayes is essential to them. Please continue the project. Dale
On Fri, June 24, 2011 22:09, skip@pobox.com <mailto:skip@pobox.com> wrote:
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty
soon, I
think it might be time to think about closing up shop. Other than the occasional, "Help! I deleted my Junk Suspects folder!" questions,
of the problems reported here over the past year have related to the 64-bit Win7 environment. We really need to find some people who can help with this.
If you have any ideas, please post them here.
What do you mean by closing shop? I would just add a notice on the website that SpamBayes is not compatible with Windows 7 64bit + Outlook 2010, and leave it at that. It works perfectly fine for my .procmailrc setup on Linux, and for many other configurations.
It's open source anyway. Anyone can checkout the repo, write a
On Jun 29, 2011 4:04 AM, "Amedee Van Gasse" <amedee@vangasse.eu <mailto:amedee@vangasse.eu>> wrote: the bulk patch, and
ask for a pull (git terminology over here, I don't know which repo SpamBayes uses).
_______________________________________________ SpamBayes@python.org <mailto:SpamBayes@python.org> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Info/Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
_______________________________________________ SpamBayes@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Info/Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
On 6/29/2011 4:08 AM, Erik Ohrnberger wrote:
I gave up on spambayes. It was letting too much spam through. At one time, it was batting 100, but I guess the spammers got smarter or something.
I'm using a gmail account now forwarded to a private (secret) inbox that my outlook pulls down.
Same here (minus the Outlook part). Spammers won because Spambayes didn't keep up, IMO. Letting us define a list of word filters and rules to apply prior to letting Spambayes do its Bayesian thing would be a vast improvement to the product despite what the devs claim. I know my e-mail better than any computer does or likely ever will. Spambayes also isn't very good about enforcing balanced ham/spam. It works best with equal parts and small numbers of ham and spam but never actually enforces either policy. 99% of what comes into many people's in-boxes is spam. The solution spammers came up with to get through Spambayes was simply to generate more spam and hope people would overtrain Bayesian filters, which is exactly what constantly happens with Spambayes. Bayesian-like filters are hard to work with and really need a trainer analyzer. A good trainer analyzer will keep the filter free of things that would not produce effective results. In this case, the elimination of spam and limited false positives. I can open my mouth here because I've actually done some development on this open source product. Or at least attempted to. My contributions a few years ago were effectively rejected, which pretty much killed any potential future efforts on my behalf. I happen to have some pretty solid C++ COM Outlook add-in development street cred, so the Spambayes devs ruined an opportunity to pick up a Windows developer with the requisite knowledge. -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President Barebones CMS is a high-performance, open source content management system for web developers operating in a team environment. An open source CubicleSoft initiative. Your choice of a MIT or LGPL license. http://barebonescms.com/
On Wed, June 29, 2011 17:42, Thomas Hruska wrote:
On 6/29/2011 4:08 AM, Erik Ohrnberger wrote:
I gave up on spambayes. It was letting too much spam through. At one time, it was batting 100, but I guess the spammers got smarter or something.
I'm using a gmail account now forwarded to a private (secret) inbox that my outlook pulls down.
Same here (minus the Outlook part). Spammers won because Spambayes didn't keep up, IMO. Letting us define a list of word filters and rules to apply prior to letting Spambayes do its Bayesian thing would be a vast improvement to the product despite what the devs claim. I know my e-mail better than any computer does or likely ever will.
You can do that if you use Spambayes as a procmail filter.
Spambayes also isn't very good about enforcing balanced ham/spam. It works best with equal parts and small numbers of ham and spam but never actually enforces either policy. 99% of what comes into many people's in-boxes is spam. The solution spammers came up with to get through Spambayes was simply to generate more spam and hope people would overtrain Bayesian filters, which is exactly what constantly happens with Spambayes. Bayesian-like filters are hard to work with and really need a trainer analyzer. A good trainer analyzer will keep the filter free of things that would not produce effective results. In this case, the elimination of spam and limited false positives.
amedee@intrepid:~$ ./bin/spamstats Spam: 2974 Ham: 2040 So I have a 3:2 ratio. It could be better, but I'm not complaining.
I can open my mouth here because I've actually done some development on this open source product. Or at least attempted to. My contributions a few years ago were effectively rejected, which pretty much killed any potential future efforts on my behalf. I happen to have some pretty solid C++ COM Outlook add-in development street cred, so the Spambayes devs ruined an opportunity to pick up a Windows developer with the requisite knowledge.
Where is your branch? I assume that you used some kind of public repository for your code? You can always fork...
Amedee (and everyone else), I use a two-pronged approach. My ISP does spam filtering based (I think) on the published blacklists. This gets rid of about 90% of the spam. A lot of the stuff that gets through is marketing material which isn't really spam, but I don't want it - a well-trained Spambayes gets rid of most of this. Not always the odd Nigerian with millions of dollars, but they can be amusing. ------------------------- Thursday, June 30, 2011, 12:03:55 PM, you wrote:
On Wed, June 29, 2011 17:42, Thomas Hruska wrote:
On 6/29/2011 4:08 AM, Erik Ohrnberger wrote:
I gave up on spambayes. It was letting too much spam through. At one time, it was batting 100, but I guess the spammers got smarter or something.
I'm using a gmail account now forwarded to a private (secret) inbox that my outlook pulls down.
Same here (minus the Outlook part). Spammers won because Spambayes didn't keep up, IMO. Letting us define a list of word filters and rules to apply prior to letting Spambayes do its Bayesian thing would be a vast improvement to the product despite what the devs claim. I know my e-mail better than any computer does or likely ever will.
You can do that if you use Spambayes as a procmail filter.
Spambayes also isn't very good about enforcing balanced ham/spam. It works best with equal parts and small numbers of ham and spam but never actually enforces either policy. 99% of what comes into many people's in-boxes is spam. The solution spammers came up with to get through Spambayes was simply to generate more spam and hope people would overtrain Bayesian filters, which is exactly what constantly happens with Spambayes. Bayesian-like filters are hard to work with and really need a trainer analyzer. A good trainer analyzer will keep the filter free of things that would not produce effective results. In this case, the elimination of spam and limited false positives.
amedee@intrepid:~$ ./bin/spamstats Spam: 2974 Ham: 2040
So I have a 3:2 ratio. It could be better, but I'm not complaining.
I can open my mouth here because I've actually done some development on this open source product. Or at least attempted to. My contributions a few years ago were effectively rejected, which pretty much killed any potential future efforts on my behalf. I happen to have some pretty solid C++ COM Outlook add-in development street cred, so the Spambayes devs ruined an opportunity to pick up a Windows developer with the requisite knowledge.
Where is your branch? I assume that you used some kind of public repository for your code? You can always fork...
_______________________________________________ SpamBayes@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Info/Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3734 - Release Date: 06/29/11
----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3734 - Release Date: 06/29/11
----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3734 - Release Date: 06/29/11
I haven't had an issue with Win7 after I discovered that Win7 won't let you install to Program Files. I installed to C:\spambayes, copied over my db and everything has worked smoothly. I have Outlook 2007, haven't touched 2010 and Win7 64 bit. ======================================================================== ======= Douglas D. Behm -----Original Message----- From: spambayes-bounces+dbehm=fa.ua.edu@python.org [mailto:spambayes-bounces+dbehm=fa.ua.edu@python.org] On Behalf Of Amedee Van Gasse Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 2:57 AM To: spambayes-dev@python.org; spambayes@python.org Subject: Re: [Spambayes] [spambayes-dev] If we don't get some more Windows help pretty soon... On Fri, June 24, 2011 22:09, skip@pobox.com wrote:
If we can't find someone with the time and inclination to dig into problems running SpamBayes in a Win7 64-bit+Outlook 2010 environment pretty
soon, I
think it might be time to think about closing up shop. Other than the occasional, "Help! I deleted my Junk Suspects folder!" questions, the bulk of the problems reported here over the past year have related to the 64-bit Win7 environment. We really need to find some people who can help with this.
If you have any ideas, please post them here.
What do you mean by closing shop? I would just add a notice on the website that SpamBayes is not compatible with Windows 7 64bit + Outlook 2010, and leave it at that. It works perfectly fine for my .procmailrc setup on Linux, and for many other configurations. It's open source anyway. Anyone can checkout the repo, write a patch, and ask for a pull (git terminology over here, I don't know which repo SpamBayes uses). _______________________________________________ SpamBayes@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Info/Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html
participants (9)
-
Amedee Van Gasse -
Dale Schroeder -
Doug Behm -
Erik Ohrnberger -
Peter Toye -
Richie Hindle -
Skip Montanaro -
Thomas Hruska -
Tim Peters