You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Thomas Harold <th...@nybeta.com> on 2014/04/08 04:23:25 UTC
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
On 4/5/2014 12:14 PM, John Hardin wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Amir Reza Rahbaran wrote:
>
>> I want to know how long it takes custom signatures updated by sa-update.
>
> Daily, if the corpora are sufficient for masscheck scoring to run.
>
> At the moment the masscheck corpus is ham-starved. There's not quite
> enough ham available for reliable scores to be generated and published.
>
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/NightlyMassCheck
> NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 2012-08-09.
Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by John Hardin <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2014, Dave Warren wrote:
> On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
>> > NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about
>> > 2012-08-09.
>> Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
>
> I'm assuming "now being" since there are regular mentions of a need for ham
> corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put some resources
> into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some messages to start the
> process.
Get in touch with Kevin McGrail for submission credentials.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maxim XI: Everything is air-droppable at least once.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
5 days until Thomas Jefferson's 271st Birthday
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by Dave Warren <da...@hireahit.com>.
On 2014-04-08 11:17, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> On 4/8/2014 2:15 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
>> On 2014-04-08 03:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:
>>>> On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
>>>>>> NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since
>>>>>> about 2012-08-09.
>>>>> Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming "now being" since there are regular mentions of a need
>>>> for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've
>>>> put some resources into setting up appropriate systems and
>>>> preparing some messages to start the process.
>>>>
>>> Yes, we can make accounts again. Did you send a request?
>>
>> Indeed, I sent a message to private@ as described on the wiki.
> OK, cc me and send again please. it might not have been moderated
> through.
Sent and CC'd, thanks!
--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
On 4/8/2014 2:15 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
> On 2014-04-08 03:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:
>>> On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
>>>>> NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since
>>>>> about 2012-08-09.
>>>> Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
>>>
>>> I'm assuming "now being" since there are regular mentions of a need
>>> for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put
>>> some resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing
>>> some messages to start the process.
>>>
>> Yes, we can make accounts again. Did you send a request?
>
> Indeed, I sent a message to private@ as described on the wiki.
OK, cc me and send again please. it might not have been moderated through.
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by Dave Warren <da...@hireahit.com>.
On 2014-04-08 03:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:
>> On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
>>>> NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about
>>>> 2012-08-09.
>>> Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
>>
>> I'm assuming "now being" since there are regular mentions of a need
>> for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put
>> some resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some
>> messages to start the process.
>>
> Yes, we can make accounts again. Did you send a request?
Indeed, I sent a message to private@ as described on the wiki.
>
> However, the ham is not starved. We have been publishing rules. Not
> sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.
Understood. However, over the last couple years, there have been
multiple times that this was mentioned (whether it was actually true or
not), which is what motivated me to attempt to contribute.
--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
On 4/9/2014 2:53 PM, Thomas Harold wrote:
> On 4/8/2014 6:56 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> Yes, we can make accounts again. Did you send a request?
>>
>> However, the ham is not starved. We have been publishing rules. Not
>> sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.
>>
>> Regards,
>> KAM
>>
>>
> Assisting in the mass-check is on my to-do list later this year. I have
> a mail account that gets 80+ spam per day and I get 5-30 outside mails
> each day.
Every little bit helps!
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by Thomas Harold <th...@nybeta.com>.
On 4/8/2014 6:56 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> Yes, we can make accounts again. Did you send a request?
>
> However, the ham is not starved. We have been publishing rules. Not
> sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.
>
> Regards,
> KAM
>
>
Assisting in the mass-check is on my to-do list later this year. I have
a mail account that gets 80+ spam per day and I get 5-30 outside mails
each day.
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
On 4/8/2014 1:16 AM, Dave Warren wrote:
> On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
>>> NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about
>>> 2012-08-09.
>> Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
>
> I'm assuming "now being" since there are regular mentions of a need
> for ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put
> some resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some
> messages to start the process.
>
Yes, we can make accounts again. Did you send a request?
However, the ham is not starved. We have been publishing rules. Not
sure where the disconnect on the firing of the script is coming from.
Regards,
KAM
Re: sa-update (nightly mass-check)
Posted by Dave Warren <da...@hireahit.com>.
On 2014-04-07 19:23, Thomas Harold wrote:
>> NOTE: New masscheck contributors are now being accepted since about 2012-08-09.
> Is that supposed to say "now being" or "not being"?
I'm assuming "now being" since there are regular mentions of a need for
ham corpus. But that's just a hopeful guess, given that I've put some
resources into setting up appropriate systems and preparing some
messages to start the process.
--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren