Bugs item #1535214, was opened at 2006-08-06 12:20 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by anadelonbrin You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=1535214&group_id=61702
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: jljacobs (jljacobs) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Mail without a To: field not sent to Inbox Initial Comment: NOted that spamBayes classified mail as ***Ham*** AND it does show up properly as Ham in the review of database BUT is ***NOT*** passed on to the Inbox (OE) and therefore is totally missing as new mail, either spam, unsure or ham. Until today after using SB for more than a year I realized that a good part of my mail was missing but only readable in the reviews of SpamBayes mail. So far NO spam arrives without a To: field in the body so that this is not an unresolvable problem. (BTW, the biggest new spam problem is 'image based' spam, which is not easily dealt with by text based statistical methodology.) I can bypass this (and as of today, 8/6/06) have in OE by setting up an OI Microsoft "rule" which is executed prior to allowing SpamBayes inputs. This hack sends such erroneous mail to the Inbox despite SpamBayes proper classification as Ham but not processing proxying it properly to the Inbox. I can provide any file that the developer(s) might want but with considerable annotation as I personally know what is Ham vs. Spam. --- John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin) Date: 2006-08-07 09:45 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=552329 This isn't particularly clear, sorry. The POP3 proxy lets *all* mail through - either with an X-Spambayes-Classification header, or an X-Spambayes-Exception header if something went wrong. Messages don't generally have a "To" in the body - this is in the headers of the message. Perhaps that was what you meant? Certainly every mail client I have seen (which includes all of the major OS X ones) does include a "To" header (but none include it in the body). If you are able to fix this by using a rule in OE, then that means that the mail *is* being delivered to Outlook Express - or the rule would never see it. Could you explain further what you mean? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: jljacobs (jljacobs) Date: 2006-08-07 08:13 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1569546 John here again ---- I note that the lack of SB passing Ham onto OE's Inbox is for me exclusively related to mail from a Mac where the mailer totally fails to insert the "To:" in the msg body. I am at a loss to deal with this as it does not always occur but appears to happen randomly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=1535214&group_id=61702 _______________________________________________ Spambayes-bugs mailing list Spambayes-bugs@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes-bugs
