28 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
28 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
Return-Path: nas@python.ca
|
|
Delivery-Date: Fri Sep 6 16:57:05 2002
|
|
From: nas@python.ca (Neil Schemenauer)
|
|
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 08:57:05 -0700
|
|
Subject: [Spambayes] Deployment
|
|
In-Reply-To: <200209061443.g86Ehie14557@pcp02138704pcs.reston01.va.comcast.net>
|
|
References: <3D788653.9143.1D8992DA@localhost>
|
|
<200209061443.g86Ehie14557@pcp02138704pcs.reston01.va.comcast.net>
|
|
Message-ID: <20020906155705.GA22115@glacier.arctrix.com>
|
|
|
|
Guido van Rossum wrote:
|
|
> I personally don't think IMAP has a bright future, but for people who
|
|
> do use it, that's certainly a good approach.
|
|
|
|
Writing an IMAP server is a non-trivial task. The specification is huge
|
|
and clients do all kinds of weird stuff. POP is very easy in
|
|
comparison. Perhaps you could forward messages to a special address or
|
|
save them in a special folder to mark them as false negatives.
|
|
|
|
Alternatively, perhaps there could be a separate protocol and client
|
|
that could be used to review additions to the training set. Each day a
|
|
few random spam and ham messages could be grabbed as candidates.
|
|
Someone would periodically startup the client, review the candidates,
|
|
reclassify or remove any messages they don't like and add them to the
|
|
training set.
|
|
|
|
Neil
|