On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:12:25 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 23:07, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> Do you know how/when the quarantine messages are triggered?
> - per message?, per x number of message in quarantine?, time based?
>
>
>
>
On 18/01/2010 23:07, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
Do you know how/when the quarantine messages are triggered?
- per message?, per x number of message in quarantine?, time based?
>>> I think it's time based. For DSPAM I think a time and/or message count
>
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:58:43 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 22:25, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Arhhh, this sound interesting too. This sounds like something that
> >> could be added to dspam without much core change- right?
> >>
> >>
> > Right.
> >
> >
> >
On 18/01/2010 22:25, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>> Arhhh, this sound interesting too. This sounds like something that
>> could be added to dspam without much core change- right?
>>
>>
> Right.
>
>
>
>> Do you know how/when the quarantine messages are triggered?
>> - per messa
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:16:49 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 22:09, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:01:18 +
> > Paul Cockings wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 18/01/2010 21:54, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Look for example at Barracuda. Have they a plugin for
On 18/01/2010 22:09, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:01:18 +
> Paul Cockings wrote:
>
>
>> On 18/01/2010 21:54, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Look for example at Barracuda. Have they a plugin for Outlook? No!
>>> They send HTML links in HTML mails. They avoid the additio
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:01:18 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 21:54, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
> > Look for example at Barracuda. Have they a plugin for Outlook? No!
> > They send HTML links in HTML mails. They avoid the additional hassle
> > to deal with a plugin. They go the simpler pa
On 18/01/2010 21:54, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> Look for example at Barracuda. Have they a plugin for Outlook? No!
> They send HTML links in HTML mails. They avoid the additional hassle
> to deal with a plugin. They go the simpler path.
Can you describe a bit further how this works? Are the retaini
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:34:38 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 21:26, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
> > Paul Cockings wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >>
> So the options could be...
>
> - send to dspam
On 18/01/2010 21:48, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 09:34 PM, Paul Cockings wrote:
>
>> On 18/01/2010 21:26, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
>>> Paul Cockingswrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
On 01/18/2010 09:34 PM, Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 21:26, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
>> Paul Cockings wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>>>
>>>
> So the options could be...
>
> - send to dspam serv
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:29:58 -0300
Edgar Díaz Orellana wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:26:00 +0100, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
> > Paul Cockings wrote:
> >
> >> On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> So the options could be...
>
On 18/01/2010 21:26, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
> Paul Cockings wrote:
>
>
>> On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>>
So the options could be...
- send to dspam server on the lan
- send to dspam server on the wan
- send to dspam
Hi.
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:26:00 +0100, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
> Paul Cockings wrote:
>
>> On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So the options could be...
>> >>
>> >> - send to dspam server on the lan
>> >> - send to dspam server on the wan
>>
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:18:18 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >>
> >> So the options could be...
> >>
> >> - send to dspam server on the lan
> >> - send to dspam server on the wan
> >> - send to dspam relay service
> >>
> >> I suppose all of these could be s
On 18/01/2010 21:14, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>>
>> So the options could be...
>>
>> - send to dspam server on the lan
>> - send to dspam server on the wan
>> - send to dspam relay service
>>
>> I suppose all of these could be setup and a clever bit of coding
>> discovers what is available to the user (
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:58:44 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 20:51, Steve wrote:
> >
> >> or should the design be changed if we
> >> wanted to develop this idea?
> >>
> >>
> > Depends. A web service works differently. The above mechanism is pure HTTP
> > while a web service work
On 18/01/2010 20:51, Steve wrote:
>
>> or should the design be changed if we
>> wanted to develop this idea?
>>
>>
> Depends. A web service works differently. The above mechanism is pure HTTP
> while a web service works asynchronously.
>
>
so a 'proper' webservice would give an acknowled
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:30:50 +
> Von: Paul Cockings
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: [Dspam-devel] Webservice training
> So it seems like we can already use this style of request to train
> email. (i'm thinking that forwarding
So it seems like we can already use this style of request to train
email. (i'm thinking that forwarding via SMTP is not always best)
*Train to Spam*
http://www.domain.tld/dspam/[email protected]&retrain=spam&signatureID=11,4b54909b399539992375514
Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> That's pretty easy to do, but i'm finding the RFC a bit confusing. Could
> you help to clarify EXACTLY what codes/code ranges should be translated?
> This may sound lazy of me, but i haven't gotten much sleep in the last
> days (weeks?)
This is a function from Roundcube c
In the case of M$ Outlook, the extension for an add-in was an dll, then
they could make via .NET or VB6, preffer .NET, it's more easy to run on
windows today, based on the .NET framework environment.
That are used widely over XP,2k3,2k8,vista and 7.
i had licences for .net and if i'm not wrong,
Bug Tracker item #2932993, was opened at 2010-01-15 18:34
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sbajic
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1126467&aid=2932993&group_id=250683
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the co
Bug Tracker item #2932993, was opened at 2010-01-15 18:34
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by sbajic
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1126467&aid=2932993&group_id=250683
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the
On 01/17/2010 08:21 PM, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Enrico Scholz writes:
>
>
>>> It should suffice to escape %u properly. See RFC 2254, "4. String
>>> Search Filter Definition". E.g. %u above would translate to
>>>
>>> foobar\)\(uid=foo\)
>>>
>> oops, I did not read RFC carefully enough
On 01/18/2010 02:40 PM, Alexander Prinsier wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 01:38 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
>>> Binaries are created using a build process. Adding a dspam binary into
>>> git also wouldn't make sense, right?:)
>>>
>>>
>> That is true for DSPAM but the Thunderbird plugin is availab
On 01/18/2010 01:38 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>> Binaries are created using a build process. Adding a dspam binary into
>> git also wouldn't make sense, right?:)
>>
> That is true for DSPAM but the Thunderbird plugin is available in binary:
> contrib/plugins/dspam-thunderbird-extension.xpi
Yeah, in
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:33:06 +0200
Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:57:00 +0100
> Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:40:40 +0100
> > Alexander Prinsier wrote:
> >
> > > On 01/18/2010 12:24 PM, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> > > > Since there seems to be such interest, d
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:30:40 +0100
Alexander Prinsier wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 12:57 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> >> We should be careful not to add binaries though, only the source code
> >> plus instructions please ;)
> >>
> > Most Windows user will be terribly overstrained with just the source.
>
On 01/18/2010 12:59 PM, Paul Cockings wrote:
> On 18/01/2010 12:30, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
>
>> On 01/18/2010 12:03 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>>
>>
>>> How did you get it? I wrote some while ago to the original author and never
>>> got a response. Funny that you got the source. How? Could yo
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:57:00 +0100
Stevan Bajić wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:40:40 +0100
> Alexander Prinsier wrote:
>
> > On 01/18/2010 12:24 PM, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> > > Since there seems to be such interest, do you think it would
> > > beneficial to include this code into our GIT repo
On 18/01/2010 12:30, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 12:03 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
>> How did you get it? I wrote some while ago to the original author and never
>> got a response. Funny that you got the source. How? Could you send me the
>> source?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Hi Steve,
>
>
On 01/18/2010 12:03 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> How did you get it? I wrote some while ago to the original author and never
> got a response. Funny that you got the source. How? Could you send me the
> source?
>
>
>
Hi Steve,
Mailed you off list.
R's,
Hugo Monteiro.
--
fct.unl.pt:~# cat
On 18/01/2010 12:30, Alexander Prinsier wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 12:57 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>
>>> We should be careful not to add binaries though, only the source code
>>> plus instructions please ;)
>>>
>>>
>> Most Windows user will be terribly overstrained with just the source.
>> C
On 01/18/2010 12:57 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
>> We should be careful not to add binaries though, only the source code
>> plus instructions please ;)
>>
> Most Windows user will be terribly overstrained with just the source. Correct
> me if I am wrong but the Thunderbird plugin is as well not just t
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:24:53 +
Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> On 01/17/2010 08:04 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:50:19 +
> > Paul Cockings wrote:
> >
> >
> >> As we don't have a good solution yet for spam/ham buttons inside outlook
> >> 2007, (or outlook 2003?) does anyon
Hey
The Dpsam Plugin from Whalfälschung works fine even with outlook 2007 and vista
64/32
The Problem is simply the mapiprop.dll which cant be registered by the
installation routine (for reason whatever)
When you get the mapiprop.dll by Mapilab and register it manually it works
fine. Also with
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:40:40 +0100
Alexander Prinsier wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 12:24 PM, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> > Since there seems to be such interest, do you think it would beneficial
> > to include this code into our GIT repos? (under HEAD obviously!)
>
> I think it would be very beneficial to
On 01/18/2010 11:40 AM, Alexander Prinsier wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 12:24 PM, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
>
>> Since there seems to be such interest, do you think it would beneficial
>> to include this code into our GIT repos? (under HEAD obviously!)
>>
> I think it would be very beneficial to inc
On 01/18/2010 12:24 PM, Hugo Monteiro wrote:
> Since there seems to be such interest, do you think it would beneficial
> to include this code into our GIT repos? (under HEAD obviously!)
I think it would be very beneficial to include the code in our
repository (contrib directory). It will make it
On 01/17/2010 08:04 PM, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:50:19 +
> Paul Cockings wrote:
>
>
>> As we don't have a good solution yet for spam/ham buttons inside outlook
>> 2007, (or outlook 2003?) does anyone have smart ideas on how we can run
>> a service/script on the exchange
Hi everyone.
Some time ago i build an application in VB6 as add-in for Outlook 2000,
maybe
i could study new versions of MSOutlook to take advantage as how they
process
and Tag the email's. but Before that we need build some daemon to receive
the
Tags from email headers then they processed by d
42 matches
Mail list logo
