Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too.
The Mass Subscribe feature has two settings: on and off. Although Mailman
was designed for users to self-install, and presumably they can trust
themselves not to abuse it, the truth is that an awful lot of Mailman list
owners do not have
Cyndi Norwitz wrote:
Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too.
The Mass Subscribe feature has two settings: on and off.
No it doesn't.
My
ISP has chosen to turn off Mass Subscribe. Only the invite feature is
left.
This is not a setting. It is a code modification done
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:51:02 -0700
From: Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can see that actual site settings something like
MAXIMUM_LIST_OWNER_SUBSCRIBES = 10
LIST_OWNER_SUBSCRIBE_WINDOW = days(7)
to allow at most 10 subscribes in any 7 day period, might be an
alternative
Cyndi Norwitz wrote:
Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too.
This is kind of an edge case. You're getting close to territory that would
probably be better handled over on the mailman-developers list, although
you're not really discussing any particular specific code changes
(figures, apparently my mail program is one of those *broken* ones so
apologies, this originally sent off list)
Hello Cyndi,
I do see where you are coming from, but abuse issues can go the opposite
direction from your description, and usually does.
The host I work for does NOT turn off mass
Hello,
I am having trouble with mailman bounced messages attempting to send to the
wrong machine.
Initially I set up mailman in a test environment - hostname sbuild6 has the web
interface and mxtest machine was the meil exchanger all went well with testing.
We have moved the installation to
Brad Knowles writes:
I don't see a problem with having this discussion continue on the
mailman-users list for now (at least you'll get the opportunity for some
feedback from other mailman list/site admins who are not on the
mailman-developers list),
I think the very political nature
Mark Heer wrote:
I am having trouble with mailman bounced messages attempting to send to the
wrong machine.
Initially I set up mailman in a test environment - hostname sbuild6 has the
web interface and mxtest machine was the meil exchanger all went well with
testing. We have moved the
Hi Krystal,
I'd be interested to know what you call double opt-in. Is it a web
subscription + email reply with the cookie, or double-that (and in
that case, what is the scenario).
FWIW I don't think the option Cindy proposes passes Occam's razor. For
the moment it looks like lots of complexity
Fil wrote:
I'd be interested to know what you call double opt-in. Is it a web
subscription + email reply with the cookie, or double-that (and in
that case, what is the scenario).
My understanding of this is that double opt-in and what I call
confirmed opt-in are the same thing and that they
We are using Feodra 8 with Mailman installed by Yum.
Just today we noticed that Mailman stopped archiving mail a month ago
(May 17th) and now Mailman is not even sending mail at all.
Earlier today I tried making some changes to the postfix config (to open
relay to some other hosts) and
Further update on this, I forgot to allow 127.0.0.1 when I made a
postfix configuration file change.
The archiving stopped working when we migrated to a new mailman server.
Do you have an idea how I can turn archiving back on for all lists?
Thanks,
Dan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Hello,
Let me first say I was in no way competing with Cyndi's suggestion, I
should probably have prefaced by saying I think the option provided is a
good one. And again, we have no modifications to Mailman that is not
built in to modify (we have turned off personalization for example, but
Dan Mashal wrote:
Further update on this, I forgot to allow 127.0.0.1 when I made a
postfix configuration file change.
Does this mean outgoing mail is now working?
The archiving stopped working when we migrated to a new mailman server.
Do you have an idea how I can turn archiving back on for
That is EXACTLY right.
Mark Sapiro wrote:
My understanding of this is that double opt-in and what I call
confirmed opt-in are the same thing and that they mean
1. User requests to be on the list via a web form, email, etc. This is
the first opt-in. Note that strictly speaking, this probably
Now that the FAQ has migrated to the Wiki, perhaps the links in the
footers of the list messages should be changed to reflect that?
Dragon
~~~
Venimus, Saltavimus, Bibimus (et naribus canium capti sumus)
Does this mean outgoing mail is now working?
Yes.
Not without knowing why it's not working. See the general trouble
shooting FAQ at http://wiki.list.org/x/A4E9.
Look at Mailman's logs. Run Mailman's bin/check_perms. Check the
archiving settings, particularly ARCHIVE_TO_MBOX, in Defaults.py -
I've got an issue where mail is handed off to mailman from sendmail
correctly, but it will sit in the qfiles/in queue for a few minutes up
to almost an hour. Then it will magically get processed though and sent
off to its destinations.
Any thoughts on what this might be?
John P.
Dan Mashal wrote:
Look at Mailman's logs. Run Mailman's bin/check_perms. Check the
archiving settings, particularly ARCHIVE_TO_MBOX, in Defaults.py -
mm_cfg.py.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailman]# /usr/lib/mailman/bin/check_perms
Warning: Private archive directory is other-executable (o+x).
Penrod, John wrote:
I've got an issue where mail is handed off to mailman from sendmail
correctly, but it will sit in the qfiles/in queue for a few minutes up
to almost an hour. Then it will magically get processed though and sent
off to its destinations.
Any thoughts on what this might be?
I'm thinking 3 may be correct. All the lists are set to yes, private,
monthly archive in the actual mailman web interface..so how would I go
about fixing this?
Thanks,
Dan
-Original Message-
From: Mark Sapiro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:31 PM
To: Dan Mashal;
Dragon wrote:
Now that the FAQ has migrated to the Wiki, perhaps the links in the
footers of the list messages should be changed to reflect that?
Good point. Thanks for reminding me!
--
Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the Python.org Postmaster Team Co-Moderator of the
Dan Mashal wrote:
I'm thinking 3 may be correct. All the lists are set to yes, private,
monthly archive in the actual mailman web interface..so how would I go
about fixing this?
The scenario I was suggesting was not an either/or, it was all three.
If the archives are private and you are
Dan Mashal wrote:
If by ArchiveRunner you mean qrunner, yes it is running.
Actually I meant ArchRunner, one of the 8 qrunner processes that should
be running, but I can see it's running from the error log.
Yes, The public directories are mostly empty and we are using
/mailman/private not
Mark Sapiro wrote
The mailman group does not have permission to create lock files in the
various /var/lib/mailman/archives/private/listname/database/
directories.
You said SELinux is off, so this must be a straight permissions issue.
I meant to add that all your missing archive messages are in
25 matches
Mail list logo
