Great. I was hoping we wouldn't need to wait for Kyle's VMs before we get going on this. Can we use CentOS4.4 and current toaster on a devel box?
I'd also like to see 1 or 2 other volunteers. Before we jump right in, I'm thinking that we need to figure out how DS is going to hook into the process. We'll need to look closely at simscan (I'm already on that email list). It'd be nice if we could keep simscan, and simply turn SA/DS on/off using simcontrol file. Just a thought. Also, I read something in the DS FAQs about easily integrating DSpam w/ clamav. I don't know anything about that yet. Justice London wrote: > Since I had to completely turn off bayes for now, I think this is a good > idea. I'll help how I can. I have a few free systems sitting around I'll > try testing, devel, etc. on if I have time. > > Justice London > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric "Shubes" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 10:41 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] dspam on the toaster > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Citando [EMAIL PROTECTED]: >> >>> Hi guys, i've read something about getting dspam on the toaster instead >>> spamassassin. >>> >>> I don't know how dspam works but, shouldn't this be a very traumatic > change? >>> I think a nice approach about this will be options. >>> >>> You can use spamassassin or dspam ( can be used BOTH ?) >>> >>> AFAIK. This is the same as clamav, you can use clamav or TrendMicro (via >>> trophie). >>> >>> >>> This could let spamassassin and dspam fans be happy together :-P >>> >>> Just my 2 cents (euro-cents :-P) >>> >>> >>> >>> >> I think that BOTH is the right way. I'm still not very convinced about > DSPAM. >> When I've the time I'm going to read the docs and setup a test server, but > meantime I'm sticking to spamassassin. >> But I think the best is to integrate DSPAM support into simscan. >> >> I've read a post about it somewhere, maybe on this list???. >> >> >> > > After reading the DSpam FAQs, I'm eager to try this out. > > I'm particularly impressed with the DSpam's ability to adapt to per-user > situations. I've always believed that adaptive learning is best applied at > the user level, not at a domain or server level. > > I also like DSpam's aspects of (claimed) high performance and low > administrative requirements. These philosophies fit well with the toaster. > > I think that SA and DSpam should not be used together though. Per the FAQs, > "If you are using blacklists, other spam filters, or any other form of > training guides, you may be doing more harm than good. If the tool is less > accurate than DSPAM is, then you will be training DSPAM to be just as > inaccurate." As far as RBLs go, I'd be inclined to continue using a small > number of loose RBLs in order to save resources. I'd like to see some test > results before making a call on this though. > > So where do we go from here? I'd like to see a team of volunteers formed to > work on a DSpam-toaster project. I'd like to participate in some fashion. > Anyone else? > > P.S. I'm still going to attempt to fix my SA bayes DB problem in the > meantime. It's urgency just dropped a bit though. > -- -Eric 'shubes' --------------------------------------------------------------------- QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
