[Spambayes] Re: Outlook users should update

[David Bolen]

"Mark Hammond" <mhammond@skippinet.com.au> writes:

> And I just checked in a few changes too.  Of most note is that the plugin
> should correctly filter all "unread, unscored" messages in your watch
> folders at startup.  Works for me - let me know if it does for you too
> <wink>

For what it's worth, unfortunately it doesn't seem to work in my
environment with an Exchange server (at least not in my case), nor did
the prior version I was running from CVS.  I just get "Processing 0
missed spam in folder 'Inbox' took 7.46883ms" at startup.  I realize
that I'm in the minority of Outlook users around here as an Exchange
corporate user. :-)

Oh, and while I'm commenting about things without contributing a fix,
I may as well mention that it seems like some recent training changes
(somewhere around a pull from CVS I did on the 14th, when it added
stuff to identify messages with no body and what not), some messages
fail to train with a traceback (in the trace window) like (XXX is a
really long hex id):

Error training message '<MAPIMsgStoreMsg, 'Welcome to see me' (read) id=XXX>'
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File ".\spambayes\Outlook2000\train.py", line 67, in train_folder
    if train_message(message, isspam, mgr):
  File ".\spambayes\Outlook2000\train.py", line 42, in train_message
    stream = msg.GetEmailPackageObject()
  File ".\spambayes\Outlook2000\msgstore.py", line 535, in GetEmailPackageObject
    text = self._GetMessageText()
  File ".\spambayes\Outlook2000\msgstore.py", line 457, in _GetMessageText
    0)       # any # of results is fine
com_error: (-2147221246, 'Invalid window handle', None, None)


It's just the occasional message - 3 out of 3000 in my last training -
and it's reproduceable on a given message, but there doesn't seem to
be obvious commonality - at least at the MUA level - to the messages.

I hesitated to comment before now in part since I wasn't sure of the
expected state of the earlier (~11/14) fetch I had done from CVS, and
since "real work" suddenly hit hard last week and I felt guilty about
not debugging further (I just manually filter at startup right now and
ignore the occasional training failure).  But if there is any specific
data you might want me to acquire I'd be happy to see what I could do.
I do intend to poke more deeply when I get a chance.

-- David