I do not see the Regular Expression in the future of PopTray

General discussion about PopTray. You love it? You hate it? Talk about it here.

Moderators: KY Dave, jojobear99, Rdsok

Guest

I do not see the Regular Expression in the future of PopTray

Post by Guest » Fri Mar 12, 2004 3:43 pm

The Regular Expressions are so difficult to write or to find that I cannot imagine that many people will use them.

PopTray became more and more sophisticated but comes a moment where it is so complicated to use a software that you switch to an other one or you just use the main options that you need.

The present beta version (3.1 beta 3) with the rules on many rows and thre regular expressions is a step that many people will not jump over.

It will be necessary to write a brochure to explain how to set up PopTray and how to use it. I thought I could do that in French in a section of one of my web sites. If I do, I will not explain how to use regular expressions.

Personnally, I really think to make a move by adding an other program to PopTray to filter the spam and to forget the rules (and a good part of the black list).

I try to translate a slogan : The best is often the enemy of the good.

User avatar
homaquebec
PopTray Family
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue May 27, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Québec (Canada)

Post by homaquebec » Fri Mar 12, 2004 3:44 pm

I am the guest above. I think I got unlog because I took too much time to write the post. Soory!

User avatar
Renier
Site Admin
Posts: 1957
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 12:54 pm
Location: Cape Town, South-Africa
Contact:

Post by Renier » Fri Mar 12, 2004 3:56 pm

Comments from other users?

++vitoco

Post by ++vitoco » Fri Mar 12, 2004 4:38 pm

Renier wrote:Comments from other users?
I think that rules are useful to be notified just for important messages, ignoring what is not relevant at some time of the day, for example, at work's desktop, but attended at home.

Giving rules the ability to automatically delete not relevant messages from server is a plus at the same price.

Moving rules to an optional plugin or external program (like K9) will remove one of my favourite PT ability: to ignore some messages and to notify with fireworks very important messages.

RegExp are also a great improvement. I don't need to maintain a huge black list or too much rules.

And requesting for a very old desire (an option to stop parsing rules after some criteria), I think that rules processing may be redesigned, giving importance to the precedence of rules (half solved by multiline rules).

++Vitoco

User avatar
KY Dave
Not the Developer
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2002 7:29 pm
Location: Burkesville, KY. U.S.A.
Contact:

Post by KY Dave » Fri Mar 12, 2004 4:44 pm

IMO Concerning the Regular Expressions
I think an APPROVED EXPRESSION thread on the forum should be made where no one but Renier and maybe vitoco could post the regular expressions after they have been evaluated and tested. Leave the other thread going where all users can post their regular expressions and then pick the ones that work and post them to the APPROVED EXPRESSION thread.

IMO Concerning the Rules
Even users that are using K9, SpamPal, or etc. need the rules to function.
It gives extra capabilities that aren't always available in the add on programs. One example is the rule to filter on the 'bad attachments', neither SpamPal or K9 will filter on that criteria.
If some users want to use regular expressions they can, if others don't they don't have to use it. But it's there if needed.

You have the rule section close enough to being done, you should finish/perfect it.
KY Dave

Family Blog
You can STOP SPAM using PopFile and PopTray.

User avatar
ComputerBob
Guru
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 5:27 pm
Location: The Gulf Coast of the Sunshine State, USA
Contact:

Post by ComputerBob » Fri Mar 12, 2004 5:53 pm

I still don't know how to write regular expressions for PopTray, but I'm glad that PT will be ready for me when I do. :wink:
ComputerBob - Making Geek-Speak Chic™
http://www.computerbob.com
One Of The Largest One-Person Sites On The Web
With Tons of Information, Software, Help, and Fun

User avatar
homaquebec
PopTray Family
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue May 27, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Québec (Canada)

Post by homaquebec » Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:43 pm

KY Dave wrote:]IMO Concerning the Rules
Even users that are using K9, SpamPal, or etc. need the rules to function.
It gives extra capabilities that aren't always available in the add on programs. One example is the rule to filter on the 'bad attachments', neither SpamPal or K9 will filter on that criteria.
If some users want to use regular expressions they can, if others don't they don't have to use it. But it's there if needed.

You have the rule section close enough to being done, you should finish/perfect it.
I am not against rules. I just do not believe that rules, so sophisticated they can be, will never be more efficient than special softwares to recognize spam. According to the Regular Expressions, I do believe what I wrote.

Nevertheless, what you wrote are good points, like finishing/perfecting the method that is presently developped because it will be useful in some cases and I think that there is one or many bugs in this function presently.

User avatar
AhmadMostafa
Enthusiast
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 7:09 am
Location: Cairo, Egypt

Post by AhmadMostafa » Sat Mar 13, 2004 12:28 am

What about making a plugin for regular expressions?
Who needs it installs it, while others can enjoy an easy poptray :wink:

Guest

Post by Guest » Sat Mar 13, 2004 1:50 am

When I wrote that most people will never know how to write or to find Regular Expressions, I was thinking to the Gauss curve. I explain.

I think that about 15 % of people who surf on Internet are experts, 15 % are less than luser. In the middle, 70 %, we have all those who can surf at a variant level of qualification. In the case that interests us - the Regular Expressions - I think that less than 15 % of the PopTrayers will use this new feature.

User avatar
homaquebec
PopTray Family
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue May 27, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Québec (Canada)

Post by homaquebec » Sat Mar 13, 2004 1:51 am

I am the guess above.

User avatar
vitoco
Veteran
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 9:22 pm
Location: Chile
Contact:

Post by vitoco » Sat Mar 13, 2004 2:02 am

homaquebec wrote:I am not against rules. I just do not believe that rules, so sophisticated they can be, will never be more efficient than special softwares to recognize spam. According to the Regular Expressions, I do believe what I wrote.
As I said before, rules are not specific for SPAM, but for popping up only for really important messages.

Although you can use other software to control SPAM, sometimes the detected messages are not removed nor invisible for PT, them are just marked as SPAM by the mailbox server so you also need a rule to do something with that message: delete it from the server, ignore it from your download or automatically move it to a special folder on your email client. PT also offers you the oportunity to mark a message as spam just as a visual way to ignore it, and manage it somehow like any other message.

Of course, I believe that rules code could be packed into a plugin, but it will be a required plugin for me. ;-)

But the center of this discussion are Regular Expressions. They can be complex enougth to be understood, but having them you can throw to the trash the other comparison methods: equal, contains, wildcard, ... The counterpart of this might be performance, but you can resume in one expression what you sould say multiple times, applying many rules instead of just one.

I'm sorry that you believe that RegExp are ONLY useful for spam discovery :-( Them can also be used to detect a virus :twisted: Seriously, it is just a powerful method to compare strings against patterns instead of constants.

I just see some scare on this feature because of the syntax of the patterns. May be because we all are used to wildcards as complex operators.

Writing RegExp in PT is much more easy than an advanced (special) search in WinWord. You only have to get used to them :roll:

As I promised, I'll write some other examples in few days, but I prefer that rules management become stable in PT. Current bugs are related to the multiline feature, not to the RegExp I guess.

++Vitoco

Borgtex
Groupie
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:32 pm

Post by Borgtex » Sat Mar 13, 2004 2:22 pm

writing basic RegExp expressions is not very difficult. However, if you don't like to use it, you just can ignore the new options. With previous versions, I created 175 rules anti-spam. A lot of them have been concentrated in a single RegExp now

Jaska
Still here
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 10:02 am

Borgtex, is it possible to share?

Post by Jaska » Sun Mar 14, 2004 9:08 pm

You wrote that you have 175 rules in one regex. Is it possible to share the regexp? Anything personal related to you removed of course.

Borgtex
Groupie
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:32 pm

Post by Borgtex » Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:58 pm

no, i didn't mean that all the 175 rules are concentrated in one RegExp, but for example, now i can filter

V*I*A*G*R*A, vi-agra, v i a g r a, and so on with only one rule, instead of making one for every variation. Look the Rules & Regular Expressions Thread (viewtopic.php?t=1552) for some useful regexp rules

User avatar
NO CARRIER
Fanatic
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Post by NO CARRIER » Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:25 pm

Thumbs up for Regular Expressions! 8)

User avatar
homaquebec
PopTray Family
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue May 27, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Québec (Canada)

Post by homaquebec » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:09 pm

NO CARRIER wrote:Thumbs up for Regular Expressions! 8)
You surely are among the 15% of the right side of the Gauss curve! :D

User avatar
Curtz
Priceless
Posts: 552
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2001 3:52 am
Location: A nice tree

Post by Curtz » Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:49 am

K9 still eliminates 99% of all spam I get... and I kill it with one rule... one rule to rule them all!

A Bayesian plugin would be great, but I wouldnt use it. K9 is simply awesome.
Support World Animal Protection!

"To ensure that the principles of animal welfare are universally understood and respected and protected by enforced legislation."

User avatar
KY Dave
Not the Developer
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2002 7:29 pm
Location: Burkesville, KY. U.S.A.
Contact:

Post by KY Dave » Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:31 am

Curtz wrote:K9 still eliminates 99% of all spam I get... and I kill it with one rule... one rule to rule them all!
I am quite happy with K9 also.

However, I have a few extra rules to notify me of certain emails.

The only spam emails that seem to get thru K9 are ones that have nothing in the body of the messages.

I'm trying a rule using BODY, EMPTY. MARK AS SPAM, IGNORE.
KY Dave

Family Blog
You can STOP SPAM using PopFile and PopTray.

User avatar
vitoco
Veteran
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 9:22 pm
Location: Chile
Contact:

Post by vitoco » Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:37 am

Curtz wrote:K9 still eliminates 99% of all spam I get...
I don't use K9. I guess it needs to download the whole message when requested by PopTray, and give to it with some kind of mark added. But PopTray must be configured to get message's body.

I think that some RegExp could kill some of the spam just by looking at the subject, without the need of downloading the whole messages, just message headers.

As I said, don't use K9 and don't know if this two phases download can be done.

++Vitoco

User avatar
NO CARRIER
Fanatic
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Post by NO CARRIER » Fri Mar 19, 2004 10:46 am

Renier, how do you proceed the body? Can you interrupt the transfer if a rule is triggered?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests