Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: Editability of messages
I will definitely issue an editing patch for 2.1 when it goes gold. Since this is one of their we don't think you should WANT to do this hot-buttons, like controlling the List-* headers, I don't want to issue patches for prerelease versions and encourage them to do any counter-engineering. --On Monday, April 15, 2002 2:09 PM -0700 Marc MERLIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:55:01AM -0400, Tom Neff wrote: Billie R. McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are using version 2.0.8 for a moderated list. But, we aren't able to edit messages before approving them (for example, to delete just one inappropriate word). How can we do this? There is a FAQ entry that wants you to hand edit various spool files, but you can patch 2.0.8 to allow message editing. I think the patch will be necessary for mailman 2.1, it unfortunately stores the message on disk in a database format, making hand editing on the mm server not that easy. -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: Editability of messages
--On Monday, April 15, 2002 4:30 PM -0700 Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one that I'm aware of on the Mailman team is against the idea of editing messages in the moderation process. That's terrific news! I will issue my patch when 2.1 goes gold. -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
[Mailman-Users] Re: editing pending messages
You can edit pending messages in Mailman 2.0.8 with the following patch. I have not tested it on 2.0.9 yet. This method will probably never make the official FAQ, but it will always be online in gzipped form at http://www.panix.com/~tneff/mailman20_edit_patch.gz First, increase ADMINDB_PAGE_TEXT_LIMIT in Mailman/Defaults.py from the default of 4096 to something bigger like 32768 or -1 for unlimited (a huge submission may render slowly in the browser!). Then apply this two-part patch. *** Mailman/Cgi/admindb.py.orig Wed Oct 10 13:31:46 2001 --- Mailman/Cgi/admindb.py Wed Oct 10 18:30:25 2001 *** *** 270,275 --- 270,277 continue # get the action comment and reasons if present commentkey = 'comment-%d' % request_id + headerskey = 'headers-%d' % request_id + contentskey = 'fulltext-%d' % request_id preservekey = 'preserve-%d' % request_id forwardkey = 'forward-%d' % request_id forwardaddrkey = 'forward-addr-%d' % request_id *** *** 278,285 --- 280,293 preserve = 0 forward = 0 forwardaddr = '' + headers = '' + contents = '' if cgidata.has_key(commentkey): comment = cgidata[commentkey].value + if cgidata.has_key(headerskey): + headers = cgidata[headerskey].value + if cgidata.has_key(contentskey): + contents = cgidata[contentskey].value if cgidata.has_key(preservekey): preserve = cgidata[preservekey].value if cgidata.has_key(forwardkey): *** *** 290,296 # handle the request id try: mlist.HandleRequest(request_id, v, comment, ! preserve, forward, forwardaddr) except (KeyError, Errors.LostHeldMessage): # that's okay, it just means someone else has already updated the # database, so just ignore this id --- 298,304 # handle the request id try: mlist.HandleRequest(request_id, v, comment, ! preserve, forward, forwardaddr, headers, contents) except (KeyError, Errors.LostHeldMessage): # that's okay, it just means someone else has already updated the # database, so just ignore this id *** Mailman/ListAdmin.py.orig Wed Oct 10 13:31:46 2001 --- Mailman/ListAdmin.pyWed Oct 10 18:40:27 2001 *** *** 122,133 return type def HandleRequest(self, id, value, comment=None, preserve=None, ! forward=None, addr=None): self.__opendb() rtype, data = self.__db[id] if rtype == HELDMSG: status = self.__handlepost(data, value, comment, preserve, !forward, addr) else: assert rtype == SUBSCRIPTION status = self.__handlesubscription(data, value, comment) --- 122,133 return type def HandleRequest(self, id, value, comment=None, preserve=None, ! forward=None, addr=None, headers=None, contents=None): self.__opendb() rtype, data = self.__db[id] if rtype == HELDMSG: status = self.__handlepost(data, value, comment, preserve, !forward, addr, headers, contents) else: assert rtype == SUBSCRIPTION status = self.__handlesubscription(data, value, comment) *** *** 172,178 data = time.time(), sender, msgsubject, reason, filename, msgdata self.__db[id] = (HELDMSG, data) ! def __handlepost(self, record, value, comment, preserve, forward, addr): # For backwards compatibility with pre 2.0beta3 if len(record) == 5: ptime, sender, subject, reason, filename = record --- 172,178 data = time.time(), sender, msgsubject, reason, filename, msgdata self.__db[id] = (HELDMSG, data) ! def __handlepost(self, record, value, comment, preserve, forward, addr, headers, contents): # For backwards compatibility with pre 2.0beta3 if len(record) == 5: ptime, sender, subject, reason, filename = record *** *** 181,186 --- 181,202 # New format of record ptime, sender, subject, reason, filename, msgdata = record path = os.path.join(mm_cfg.DATA_DIR, filename) + # Handle editing + if len(headers)+len(contents): +fp = open(path) +unixfrom = fp.readline() +rest = fp.read() +# Parse headers and body +parts = string.split(rest,'\n\n') +if len(headers) == 0: +headers = parts[0] +if len(contents) == 0
[Mailman-Users] Re: Removing those extra List-* headers
Sorry, I missed this when it first appeared. John W Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One can patch the installation, if one manages the Mailman installation and has or develops the skills. One can't, if one uses the Mailman installation managed as a service by someone else. Suitable bribes to that person might help, though. I think I remember the OP saying that he was in the using-a-service camp. Right, if the ISP is offering Mailman as a 'canned' service *AND* you're not allowed to install your own copy and use that instead, then you can't install any patches. The good news is that even if the Mailman authors were to decide to make the List-* headers a per-list option in 2.1 (which they won't), you'd probably have no luck convincing the ISP to upgrade anyway. Sometimes an ISP will offer Mailman as an installable software option via checkbox on your web-based server configurator etc... but actually you could install your own copy if you wanted to. In that case, install it yourself and patch away. Personally, I wouldn't run Mailman somewhere I hadn't installed it. Still on my todo list is a per-list config patch for the headers. -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
[Mailman-Users] Re: use of MIME stripping plugins
I tried and shelved stripmime.pl. Demime kicks its butt gives much more comprehensive service. My advice is to install and use it instead. -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
[Mailman-Users] Re: stripmime
Some suspicious individual named Skip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thelist: |/usr/local/bin/stripmime.pl|/home/mailman/mail/wrapper post thelist Viewing a generated plain text digest I can't see that stripmime.pl did anything. None of the five messages was lost, but none appear to have been altered in any way. Am I perhaps missing something? I thought it's main thing was to zap HTML attachments. If you are worried that the alias isn't being processed at all or that Stripmime isn't being run, you can always put a '|tee /tmp/worrynot' into that pipe. If you get verification that Stripmime is running, but it's just acting like 'cat', then consider installing 'demime' which is much more flexibile and capable. I tried both and definitely settled on demime. http://scifi.squawk.com/demime.html -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
[Mailman-Users] Re: MIME Digests
MIME Digests (ultimate misnomer) still suck, even if somebody misidentified them with the words Outlook Express. They exist because the architecture allowed it, not to solve a practical problem. Regardless of terminology, we should make sure that Mailman users know how to avoid them. -- Mailman-Users maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: MIME Digests
The problem is that they don't really Digest or pack anything, or save any space, or do anything except collate a bunch of stuff into a multipart sandwich. There's precious little of use to be done with them that you couldn't do just as easily by getting individual messages and putting them into a folder, which more mail agents can successfully do than will handle all the exploding and stuff. As the original poster said, they are useless for the thing Digests were really good for, which was saving a lot of overhead and scanning a day's traffic in a single read. I am glad of the fact that 1153 will never go away. --On Wednesday, November 28, 2001 10:42 AM -0800 J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIME digests solve several problems, not least of which is providing a message packing format which is easily burst back into it original component messages. -- Mailman-Users maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: MIME Digests
Don't blame the weaknesses of your selection of tools on the material. -- J C Lawrence I speak as a list manager, not as an individual member. As a member I am fully prepared to get use any tool I need to deal with stuff, but as a list manager I cannot presume that my members will be in the same position. It's an application of one of the other time-honored Net principles which appears headed to the grave of history on the same hearse: be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you accept. -- Mailman-Users maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
