I was the only one to report it and old enough to notice the change. I received
a few personnal emails from the list, blaming it as accident caused by list
behaviour. Outlook (express and regular) are very common clients, and it wasn't
an individual problem. All other lists work for me.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Alexander Malysh
To: Development mailing list
Cc: Nikos Balkanas
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add support of smsc-id for smpp-tlv group
Ok, you are the one who find it wrong but OK I changed it back.
Am 03.09.2009 um 11:14 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Hi Alex,
The only reason you see a Cc: is because I add it manually. Mailman adds
the Reply-To field, and when I use <Reply All> from my Outlook, I get:
To: Development mailing list; Development mailing list
Cc:
which is clearly wrong.
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Alejandro Guerrieri
To: Development mailing list
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add support of smsc-id for smpp-tlv group
Nikos,
I've received your email and the headers are:
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add support of smsc-id for smpp-tlv group
Date: 2 de septiembre de 2009 15:48:20 GMT+02:00
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Is your "Reply-To" configured to the devel list, or that header was added
by mailman?
The debate about what's the proper approach to reply-to is far from being
settled:
http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-admin/node11.html
Anyway, reply-to-all works for me on devel and users lists, using
Mail.app and GMail respectively, I don't know what's exactly your problem with
it?
Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
[email protected]
On 02/09/2009, at 15:48, Nikos Balkanas wrote:
Hi Alex,
Your comment at that point could have been more clear:
/* The default smsc-id is set to "def;ault" since it is an illegal
smsc-id and cannot be configured by a user */
And please reply to my latest mail in the thread, otherwise you are
quoting out of context.
With respect to lists:
> I fixed Reply-To already. And this is you that make it don't work.
Please use reply to all or just reply and reply to
> the devel list instead of private.
What is this? I use private? You are mistaken. I only use Reply-All. I
make it not to work? I don't think so. I don't have any problems with any of
the other lists that I am subscribing.
But with your lists in the field To: I get:
Users mailing list <[email protected]>; Users mailing list
<[email protected]>
Nothing in the Cc:
Old Headers:
To: Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
Cc: Development mailing list <[email protected]>
This also takes care of [email protected]
New headers:
To: Users mailing list <[email protected]>
Reply-To: Users mailing list <[email protected]>
Your lists will now only work with Reply-To. When you change default
behaviour you confuse the hell out of people that are using the list correctly.
Please revert to old configuration,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Alexander Malysh
To: Nikos Balkanas
Cc: Development mailing list
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add support of smsc-id for smpp-tlv group
Am 02.09.2009 um 12:33 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Yes, but octstr_split can return a single member list, same way it
would handle single smsc-ids configured by the user. I have no reading
problems, and your comment doesn't explain why you have to use a list of smscs
as your default, just that ';' can be used as list seperator since it is not
allowed in the smsc-id name.
; used in the middle of default smsc-id because ; can't be there in
the smsc-id configured by user
because this is split char and always skipped. Imagine user defines
smsc-id=def;ault What we get after octstr_split(..., octstr_imm(";"))?
Yes we get list with def and ault but never def;ault.
Hope this is clear now?
In terms of efficiency i imagine it would take twice as much time
to process a list of 2, than a list of one. Plus it doesn't look good.
see above, this is _not_ a list!
PS: Can you please fix the Reply-To field in the lists
(users+devel)? For the past 2 months they don't work right.
I fixed Reply-To already. And this is you that make it don't work.
Please use reply to all or just reply and reply to the devel list instead of
private.
And please don't use [email protected] address. This is wrong!
Please use [email protected].
To clarify: [email protected] and [email protected] set Reply-To to
mailing list. So we can help people avoid reply to person but not to list.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Alexander Malysh
To: Development mailing list
Cc: Nikos Balkanas
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add support of smsc-id for smpp-tlv group
Hi,
Am 02.09.2009 um 10:13 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Hi Alex,
Looks good. Some typos:
Userguide:
string <-> stringr
...this TLV valid <-> ...this TLV is valid(twice).
fixed in my version...
gw/smsc/smpp_pdu.c: 69
+#define DEFAULT_SMSC_ID "def;ault"
Is this right? Did you mean "default"?
seems you read only even rows? :)
/* we use ; in the middle because ; is split char in smsc-id and
can'be in the smsc-id */
#define DEFAULT_SMSC_ID "def;ault"
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh"
<[email protected]>
To: "Development mailing list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 12:58 AM
Subject: [PATCH] add support of smsc-id for smpp-tlv group
Hi list,
seems I was to lazy and didn't implement smsc-id support for
smpp-tlv
group :)
Attached is patch that corrects this.
The rule to look for smpp-tlv group is as follows:
1) by start we put smpp-tlv to smsc-id specific Dict if none
given to
default smsc-id.
smsc-id may be a list splitted by ;
2) then if we need tlv by name/tag we look first for specific
smsc-id
Dict and if tlv
not found for default smsc-id
Comments are welcome.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
