Mailman Admin writes:
The problem is, that even after bin/fixurl is run, the archive directory
/var/lib/mailman/archives/private/ has owner:group = mailman:mailman .
You have to set it to wwwrun:mailman, in order for the apache server to
have write access to it too.
The httpd doesn't
Mailman Admin writes:
On 2012-06-25 09:37, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Mailman Admin writes:
The problem is, that even after bin/fixurl is run, the archive directory
/var/lib/mailman/archives/private/ has owner:group = mailman:mailman .
You have to set it to wwwrun:mailman
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
The httpd doesn't need access to the archives; the mailman CGI does.
So the CGI wrapper should be setgid mailman. Is it?
Yes it is.
Is /var/lib/mailman/archives/private/ group-writable? If not, I'm
stumped; it should be possible
Mark Sapiro writes:
What does ls -l /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/create (assuming that's the
correct path to the create wrapper) show?
Answer: I have no directory called create in the
/var/lib/mailman/directory structure
As Mark points out, it's /usr/..., not /var/ Many
Mark Sapiro writes:
The other way is to just write a script to add the tracking code to
every archives/private/*/*/+([0-9]).html file.
Shouldn't that be archives/private/*/*/[0-9]+\.html?
Steve
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mark Sapiro writes:
No.
Sorry! Gotta stop writing non-urgent mail on planes (especially when
flying out of a disaster area)
What I wrote is a bash extglob
*sigh* Yet another reason to hate bash (YMMV of course, not a
criticism of you for using it!)
Christopher Adams writes:
I am finally getting around to to upgrading Mailman 2.1.13. Should
I upgrade to 2.1.14 and then upgrade to 2.1.15, or just go directly
to 2.1.15?
You can just go directly. Of course check the UPGRADING document
for a refresher, but there are no particular tasks
Khalil Abbas writes:
Hi, Thanks for the tip, but my problem isn’t with deferred mail, no mail is
getting rejected from the remote MTA's.. but my problem is that the main
hardware node is distributing the mail over the 120 MX nodes slowly.. I have
set the SMTP_MAX_RCPTS to 5 per message
Lucio Crusca writes:
Feel free to try subscribing to the above list and try posting from
gmail.
OK, but it will have to wait until tomorrow. I need to sleep after
that last goal by Mexico. :-(
Like I said, I suspect it depends on the list. My current best guess is
that older lists
Lucio Crusca writes:
Actually I already suspected that no RFC said what a MUA should do with
messages. However Gmail is accessible via POP/IMAP also. AFAICT the same
messages are lost also when accessing gmail via POP/IMAP, and in that case
GMail is not only a MUA and it does break
Lucio Crusca writes:
Again, that's not the point and we basically agree gmail is bad,
but... a standard is some set of commonly accepted rules. Be it
written down into a RFC or not.
It doesn't need to be in an RFC, but it must be written. What is
commonly accepted is simply not a standard
Brad Knowles writes:
I really don't think that this is a disk storage issue, I think
this is much more likely to be a wrong-headed idea that this kind
of thing will be beneficial to the users -- after all, they know
that they sent the message and that copy is sitting in the outbox,
so
Brad Knowles writes:
The problem is that you're not going to find a unified solution to
all these problems.
Not soon, but Mailman 3 will make it easier to integrate such with
Mailman (within a few months, I guess). The actual work may take
years unless substantial resources are contributed,
Adam McGreggor writes:
That might be overkill, in which case, if you can ignore/find an
additional service for c), and if your users are comfortable with
Wikis, a wiki may be a reasonable alternative. Some even have
permissions models -- Twiki springs to mind.
As does ZWiki, although
Lindsay Haisley writes:
but if they're going to make modifications to it, they need to share
those modifications back with us
Doesn't their failure to do so violate the GPL?
No. The GPL requires that you grant certain rights to use of your
code to downstream recipients, not that you
Brad Knowles writes:
Doesn't their failure to do so violate the GPL?
In this respect, I believe that they are probably in violation of
the spirit of the GPL, but perhaps not in the letter of the law.
RMS is adamantly opposed to that interpretation of the spirit of the
GPL, and has said
Brad Knowles writes:
More importantly, it would be much less difficult for us to support
that part of the community, which would help reduce the support
burden that Apple has to maintain.
C'mon, Brad, it's *annoying* to have to support that part of the
community, but it's never been
Brad Knowles writes:
On Aug 20, 2012, at 9:03 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
Which is probably why they are so very violently opposed to having
any GPL-encumbered code anywhere in the company.
GCC? gdb? binutils? Make? CUPS? Mailman?
Gcc gdb are gone
Brad Knowles writes:
However, I am starting to wonder if this kind of stuff going away
is not part of an overall effort to dumb-down OS X so that it can
be unified with iOS.
Could be, but in that case I would expect that their strategy is to
completely eliminate server support, and try to
On 9/20/2012 12:22 PM, Drew Tenenholz wrote:
When I post to the umbrella and I am a subscriber to BOTH child lists, I see:
Subject: Child1 UMBRELLA Test Post
Subject: Child2 UMBRELLA Test Post
It's not really what I want to see, so I wonder if this changed
in future versions of
Dennis Putnam writes:
Is there a way to suspend or otherwise prevent a subscriber from posting
to a list and send a notice of same, without actually unsubscribing and
officially banning them?
1. In the Membership page, set the member to moderated.
2. In the Privacy | Sender Filters page,
Mark Sapiro writes:
Do you understand what I'm saying above?
I am not saying that you should not set your subscription to no mail.
I am saying that if you make this choice, you should not place the
burden of this choice upon others by asking them to Cc you on replies.
You should
P.V.Anthony writes:
Is this true for all versions of mailman?
All versions so far released by this project, yes. cPanel and maybe
some other third-party distributions have patched versions of Mailman
that allow one instance of Mailman to handle multiple domains with
independent namespaces for
Kalbfleisch, Gary writes:
inundated with confirmation request messages, and you cannot delete
them all at once on the Tend to pending moderator requests
screen. You have to select Discard for each of them
individually. I don't know if this has been changed yet.
As far as I can see,
Kalbfleisch, Gary writes:
Kalbfleisch, Gary responds:
Messages are batchable, but administrative tasks are not. As you
noted you must tick each box, and yes I'm talking pages and pages
of bogus subscription requests. Quite tedious.
This would be a bigger problem than losing valid
Kalbfleisch, Gary writes:
I personally don't care for CAPTCHA but it exists for a reason.
Sure, the eternal search for easy solutions to difficult problems.
If anyone can suggest a better solution I would love to here it.
Right now Mailman is being exploited to email bomb individuals and
Lindsay Haisley writes:
Take a look at http://areyouahuman.com/.
I just tried their sample. I'd rather face a CAPTCHA! And their
twitter feed reads like spam -- same comments, same apparent author,
different avatar. Not a great start if they want to captcha my lists!
;-)
Seriously, I can
Kalbfleisch, Gary writes:
Note that for the majority of what I have seen in this attack it
is the return email messages that the exploiters desire.
Yes, this is the most important point for Mailman developers, in
fact. Thank you for reiterating it.
I have seen some evidence that these
Rodrigo Abrantes Antunes writes:
Searching google I found that this error isn't related to the number of
users in the list, it occurs because the total number of addresses in the
To: and Cc: headers of the post equals or exceeds
max_num_recipients.
The operational issues have already
Lindsay Haisley writes:
On the other hand, most people get spam, and hate it, and can
appreciate that their own interests are served by having to jump
through a hoop or two to make sure that they're entering a bot-free
zone.
Sure, all of that is true, except for the implication that
Lindsay Haisley writes:
I would run swaks from the same box on which you run Mailman, and use -f
with whatever Mailman uses as the envelope sender address for
posts,
Wow, that's cool! Thanks for the tip!
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Lindsay Haisley writes:
I would have thought that everyone who works with or develops any
application or server that handles e-mail would know about swaks.
*They* probably do. *I* am an economics professor[1] who moonlights
on programmer's editors and host admin for one such project. ;-)
Ben Cooksley writes:
A pity, as the subscription form definitely could do with the same
form of protection.
Think about what you're saying. Open subscription either means open
subscription, or an admin has to do all the work. There's no third
way. (Well, there is, but it only applies to
Tanstaafl writes:
On 2012-11-13 1:52 AM, Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.net wrote:
If I knew how to tell if a header was spoofed, I could do that, but I
don't know how to tell; do you?
Maybe an alternative would be an option that for every message posted to
the list, a confirmation email
Ben Cooksley writes:
If Mailman were to implement basic CSRF protection for all POST requests
that would also slow the attackers down I suspect (as they would have to
make a GET request first and parse it).
It might slow a human down, but as soon as it becomes a feature of
Mailman, the
Lindsay Haisley writes:
It's not unusual at all. From the point of view of DNS, there's no
difference between a virtual domain and a real one.
Actually, that's not true. In the context of Mailman, the most
important one is that an MX record must point to a real domain (ie,
one with an A
Roger Richmond writes:
I have had a problem with Mailman stripping out MS Word documents, and have
partially solved it by adding application/msword to the pass mime types
section. However, Mailman still strips out documents created in Office 2007
and later, with the .docx extension.
Karsten Becker writes:
WTF?
Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect: ('localhost', 10030)
Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect: (10030, 'localhost')
Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: '220 mail01.foodmz.local
ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'
Dec 04
Gökhan Alkan writes:
the /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases file . And also main.cf file contains
the line alias_maps =
hash:/etc/mail/aliases,hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases. But it doesnt
run and returns unknwon user.
As a wild guess, I bet Postfix also wants to be informed about
Gökhan Alkan writes:
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
virtual_transport = dovecot
dovecot unix - n n - - pipe flags=DRhu
user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${user}
It looks to me like your mailman
Jan Krohn writes:
The Japanese list however is behaving extremely strange. I'm not sure
whether this is a bug or misconfiguration on my side.
It's not due to it being Japanese. I've run Japanese lists for years
with no such effect.
The digest being sent out is the same one every day, and
Mark Sapiro writes:
The League CA Cities wrote:
some of my list are being spammed with bot subscription request. I am
looking for a way to add a hidden field to the subscription page of each
list that a bot would see but a human user will not.
I would like to have Mailman
Mark Sapiro writes:
The asking of a question which requires an obvious to a human but
extremely difficult to a machine answer is probably the best
defence as long as the questions and answers aren't fixed over many
Mailman installations.
That's a great idea, actually! How about a
Richard Damon writes:
These methods are designed to repel most attacks.
Sure, that is understood. The problem is that if a particular method
is recommended here, there will be a request to add it to Mailman. At
that point it becomes worth breaking the defense.
The idea is these bots are
Mark Sapiro writes:
Python is indentation-sensitive. Do you really mean a dedent there
relative to the surrounding stanza? It doesn't seem to be an artifact
of TABs or something like that.
Find the section in the definition of the files() method that looks like
if ext
Mark Sapiro writes:
No, it's just lack of careful typing and proof-reading on my part.
(Also, a clue that what I wrote was inadequately tested at best).
Hey, I wouldn't worry about it. You play more games of the season
than Ichiro and you bat about .950!wink/
Philip R. Canterbury writes:
mail is coming into my spam box I don't know if this is problem
for all the people on my list, but is their something i can change?
Stop using Yahoo for your mail, as far as your personal situation
goes. I'm only half-joking -- I'm in the fortunate position of
dc writes:
How can a non-subscribed address (From: Dropbox
no-re...@dropboxmail.com) post to a closed mailing list?
That would not authorize the post. However, From is not the only
datum checked.
Why wasn't this invitation rejected?
Because the sender's address appeared in one of the
Duane Winner writes:
Does anyone have any ideas on how to deal with this dilemma: I am
running Mailman+Postfix+Ubuntu in Amazon AWS, and using Amazon SES
as a relay. Although, this problem isn't unique to just SES. This
problem is common among many relay services, DynDNS to name
: Stephen J. Turnbull (step...@xemacs.org) f...@acceptable.com
You could also do
From: Stephen J. Turnbull f...@acceptable.com
Reply-To: step...@xemacs.org, l...@your-host.org
People would have to be careful to clean out the unneeded address, but
everything they need
Duane Winner writes:
When sending through Amazon SES, instead of using the
From address of your user, instead use your organization's email
address with a friendly name which identifies the user. Only
the email address portion is verified, so you can send with
From addresses like so:
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
Duane Winner writes:
When sending through Amazon SES, instead of using the
From address of your user, instead use your organization's email
address with a friendly name which identifies the user. Only
the email address portion is verified, so you
Like Joseph, I don't know what /.*+/ does, but this
$ echo 'From bounce' | perl -ane 'print if /From.*bounce/;'
From bounce
$ echo 'From bounce' | perl -ane 'print if /From.*+bounce/;'
$
shows what it doesn't do.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Tanstaafl writes:
On 2013-02-15 10:25 AM, Joseph Brennan bren...@columbia.edu wrote:
I am uncertain what /.*+/ would do. Remove either * or +.
As Joseph says, change the first part of your regexp from ^From:.*+
to ^from:.* or ^from:.+ (I would choose the former because it's
more inclusive,
Yosem Companys writes:
Hi all,
I'm one of the moderators of the Stanford University Program on Liberation
Technology at http://liberationtechnology.stanford.edu/.
You've come to the right place. Mailman is a liberating technology!
I was wondering whether someone on this list could
Mark Sapiro writes:
It's hard to say, but it seems that you have list members in multiple
domains all served by the same google mail MX, and google doesn't like
receiving multiple recipient domains in a single SMTP transaction.
Other way around, I think. The Google MX in question seems to
Joseph Brennan writes:
I reported this a few months ago, as a Google Apps for Edu customer, and
Google refuses to fix it. I spent a couple of weeks back and forth with
several people, and I got beyond the first line helpdesk. None of them
could give me a good explanation,
I bet they
Joseph Brennan writes:
Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
I bet they think it's an anti-spam measure. None of the big services
likes to talk much about that.
That's what frontline helpdesk told me, but no one could explain how
it reduces spam.
Rich man's graylisting
Joseph Brennan writes:
- Andrei - tucsonand...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like members to receive email with From: Mailing List Name
How will people know who wrote each message?
Obviously, the Cabal authored it.
P.S. There is no cabal.
Sergio Bastian Rodríguez writes:
Thanks for your answer, Mark.
I can not understand one issue of that behaviour. All emails are
send/receive by the same email client, Outlook 2003 and 2007
versions. So, when all costumers used the same client software ,
is possible that sometimes
I see the conversation has continued as I wrote. I'll try
to avoid duplication, but it would be a mess to rewrite the whole thing.
Bruce Harrison writes:
OK, there are no headers in the Sent folder as the mail message
gets copied in there before it goes thru the mail systems, so
nothing
Bruce Harrison writes:
Thanks for a good, detailed explanation.
You're welcome. This kind of problem gets sadly technical really
quickly.
Our one remaining Barracuda boxes is an outgoing mail filter,
I really should keep my random opinions to myself. I'm sure it does a
good job, I was
Mark Sapiro writes:
On 3/14/2013 3:22 PM, Bruce Harrison wrote:
j...@mailman.utm.edu was not in the Sent folder message at all.
We understand that and never expected it to be. The question is in
exactly what context in the Cc: in the sent folder is Judy found.
To be specific, we
fr...@library.iisc.ernet.in writes:
grep -r Fri Mar 8 10:09:05 IST 2013 *
Try
grep -r Fri Mar 8 10:09:05 IST 2013 *
(note two spaces before 8 in Mar 8)
Grep is not very smart that way
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mark Sapiro writes:
Aside: If you'd post from your subscribed address, you'd avoid
moderation delay and possible rejection of your post.
I think Drew already knows this, but since Mark mentions the member
filter here, I'd like to remind users that if one has several possible
posting
Neil Anuskiewicz writes:
You guys are saying that I could contact Google and actually have some
influence? Have a lot of other people brought up the issue with
them?
No, that was ironic. A lot of people (including several on this list)
have contacted them and asked them to make it
David Roth writes:
Is there anything open-source to make a Mailman legacy archive searchable?
FreeWAIS (oldie but still goodie), Namazu, and Xapian come to mind.
They all require some effort on the part of the user, though. I don't
know of anything that you can trivially install (eg, from RPM
William Bagwell writes:
As long as it defaults off and is user selectable I think this would be a
nice feature.
No, by definition it's a nasty feature, as it involves nonconformance
to RFC 5322.
Suggested similar in the past... It will break threading for those
of us who want full
William Bagwell writes:
So if a list adds a footer to the body of a message (many do) then that
implies that the Message-ID /should/ be changed.
No. As the section you quoted later shows, that is a syntactic
difference and clearly *not* a reason for changing the Message-ID.
Obviously
Al Black writes:
Specifically, I have some users on a couple of lists that are gmail
users with multiple accounts linked to that gmail address. They
use it to send mail while at work, but still have it appear to come
from their home address.
This means that the envelope address will not
Mark Sapiro writes:
I have nothing to add to Mark's answer to question 1.
2- If that email consumes 200GB of my monthly bandwidth, while my
monthly bandwidth limit is only 8GB, sending that one email will
explode and break down my whole website or it will just give me an
error that
Richard Damon writes:
There is a fourth case, Host Provider sends the emails then sends you a
bill for the overage at the rate specified in the contract. This could
be very expensive for going that much over limit.
All I can say is, ouch! :-(
Brian Canty writes:
I have removed all my subscribers from a list, but 2 of them will not
unsubscribe. Does anyone know of any way I can get to the raw
subscription list and manually remove them?
Membership management | mass remove from that list's admin page? Or
is that what you've
Lindsay Haisley writes:
Is there any support in any version of Mailman for total end to end
message security?
Not in a distributed version, although as mentioned in another post
there's a patch. There's a GSoC proposal to implement some such thing
for Mailman 3, with a reasonable UI for
Barry S. Finkel writes:
The in front of From in message bodies IS REQUIRED.
Only by the archive builder.
Specifically, AFAIK you are correct, Pipermail will split an mbox to
messages on any line matching ^From , and leave any From lines
in the resulting archive. There are two ways to
Mark Sapiro writes:
On 05/16/2013 01:48 AM, Jan Lausch wrote:
Is that a correct MIME-set?
As Mark says, it's conformant to MIME in that a MIME conforming MUA is
perfectly happy to process that encoded file as part of the message
body's text, completely oblivious to the fact that it's really
Drew Tenenholz writes:
Is there a good reference to what ports and protocols they should
leave alone so we can keep working?
These can be changed in mm_cfg.py, I believe, but incoming 80 (HTTP)
and 25 (SMTP) and outgoing 25 (SMTP) cover most sites. Incoming 443
(HTTPS) is another
Janice Boothe writes:
It seems rather odd and extremely limiting that Mailman functiuons
as you describe in regards to confirm.
Yes, it's limiting, and the limitation was probably deliberate.
Because the confirmation page is viewable by just about anybody,
providing a customizable template
Janice Boothe writes:
Perhaps you are adding in additinal languages that have such little
use just to be able to say you offer a huge number of languages?
If there was a real use for all of the others, then someone soudl;
translate.
There was a real use. That's why someone *did*
Jay Ashworth writes:
A few grafs on this in the doco or on the wiki might not go amiss,
unless I'm really the only person who's ever asked, in which case
nevermind. :-)
I still don't understand what you're asking for, unless it's
Mailman subscribes *exactly* the address you give it. In
Mark Sapiro writes:
On 06/03/2013 03:21 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote:
Could there be an easier way? I don't want to run the risk of
list owners overdoing this, but some spam usernames are super
obvious. Like freecredit or onlinepoker.
Learn simple regular expressions. There are lots
Mark Sapiro writes:
The bug is only that if you select Add invalid address to one of
these sender filters: Mailman will add the address to one of the
*_these_nonmembers filters and later you will be unable to edit that
filter through the web UI unless and until you remove the invalid
Jan Lausch writes:
I mean, the main wiki page
http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/Mailman+3.0 has been last updated
3 years ago.
Yeah, this is a problem. There's been a lot of water flowed under
that bridge since then, but you can only see it if you look at the
source trees (I mean the NEWS
Mark Sapiro writes:
Your patron requested unsubscribe and answered the confirmation on Mar 1
and was then removed from the list. Subsequently on May 6 the patron
replied again to the original May 1 confirmation email which was still
in his/her mailbox. This time the confirmation token had
Jan Lausch writes:
Deal all,
I typically would prefer to see the queue of messages awaiting
moderation in time order, not alphabetically by email address
as happens by default.
I totally second that notion.
Is it worth thinking about threading them?
Richard Damon writes:
I will say that for a list I run, I find the alphabetical ordering
useful.
Indeed. Ordering will be an option, and since this request is hardly
a FAQ (though I think it a pretty obviously worthwhile feature), I
suppose that the default will be the traditional
Joe writes:
I would like to have mail addressed to the list with a simple
'Reply' and addressed to both the list and the sender with a 'Reply
All'.
Can Mailman be configured to behave this way ?
No. Replies are generated by subscriber-side mail clients, not by
Mailman. Mailman
Kip Warner writes:
Apparently Mailman doesn't handle opt-in confirmations in a way that is
compliant with it. Specifically, it doesn't log new subscriptions or the
IP addresses of the confirmation. Is this correct?
Each step of a subscription is logged. IP addresses of web requests
are
Kip Warner writes:
Hey Stephen. Thanks for your help. I passed on your comments to DH and
this is what they said:
The web interface has the same problem as the mail interface --
the logs rotate and are not available after a certain span of
time. Everything
Javad Hoseini-Nopendar writes:
I have created a mailing list named iranr...@iranravi.com, but I have a
problem. I believe a few members of the mailing list don't really like to
receive all the emails of the list. They don't like to take part in
discussions. but they only like to receive
David writes:
If anyone has or can come up with an itemized, file-by-file,
checklist,
There's not going to be anything like that. These things differ from
OS to OS and from site to site.
I can tell you that aside from standard Mailman code, docs, and
website data, Debian's mailman package
Kip Warner writes:
Yes indeed. I'd say it's just pure lazyiness.
Sorry to hear that. If there's anything we can do to help, let us
know.
And they may see the light. Anything's possible, these days:
cPanel has decided to adopt a positive attitude and support us with
feature requests and
Dave Blakemore writes:
Specifically I have one user who is not receiving notes
It would help if you are more precise about this. Never received
anything since subscription? Check the subscribed address for
accuracy. I'm not sure how you can check for invisible characters
(like space and
Nezih Yasar writes:
Hello everybody,
I am an owner of a list using Mailman.
We have more than 200 active senders in a 2000-member list.
We need a setup tool to restrict 2 messages per day for every user.
Is it available such a setup in Mailman?
No.
Does anyone have any experience
Richard Damon writes:
On 7/15/13 4:03 PM, Nezih Yasar wrote:
We have enough additional lists sharing the traffic but this is an alumni
list without moderation. It has a central role. Each alumni has a right to
affiliate the list.
OK. I still suspect that starting a new list for
Stephen Cook writes:
I've been asked to migrate the mailing lists from Lyris Listmanager
running on Windows 2003 to Mailman on Red Hat Enterprise.
... requests to http://oldserver.mydomain.com; should go the the
old Windows server, and myl...@oldserver.mydomain.com should go
to the new
Stephen Cook writes:
Yes, oldserver will only be a web server, so all mail can be forwarded to
the new server.
In brief, it looks I should:
1) Forward all mail from oldserver.mydomain.com to newserver.mydomain.com
using an MX record or an SMTP forward on oldserver.mydomain.com
2)
Patrick McEvoy writes:
Hello,
I have just set up a Mailman mailing list. When I send an email to the
list the email header each member receives has my email address in the
From field and the list email address in the To field instead of the
recipient's email address in the To field.
Thomas Murgan writes:
This does not work for me:
ProxyPass /mailman http://internal-server/mailman
ProxyPassReverse /mailman http://internal-server/mailman
If you want all URLs starting with http://external-server/mailman; to
be forwarded to corresponding URLs at
Patrick McEvoy writes:
For example Dear Mr for males and Dear Mrs females.
Best avoided, for various reasons as Mark mentions, and also because
of the Miss/Mrs/Ms issue for women.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
601 - 700 of 1551 matches
Mail list logo
