On 02/12/2015 12:28 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Andrew Daviel writes:
> >
> > Experimentally, if I add "X-No-Archive: no" in Alpine or
> > Thunderbird, pipermail will not archive the message,
>
> Do you consider that a bug?
>
> I'm not sure why anybody would use "X-No-Archive: no" in reality, I
> wonder if it's a mistake in interpreting the double negation.
As I posted earlier Mailman does not archive a message with an
X-No-Archive: header. It doesn't look at the content which could be yes,
no, empty or anything else. This is deliberate.
It does look at the content of an X-Archive: header which must be (case
insensitive) no to suppress archiving.
This is explained in the code and comments which Andrew quoted in the
same post partially quoted above
> I found it implemented in
> /usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Handlers/ToArchive.py, viz.
> # Common practice seems to favor "X-No-Archive: yes". No other value for
> # this header seems to make sense, so we'll just test for it's presence.
> # I'm keeping "X-Archive: no" for backwards compatibility.
> if msg.has_key('x-no-archive') or msg.get('x-archive', '').lower() ==
> 'no':
> return
So the experiment just confirms that the code does what it says. Given that
X-No-Archive: no
apparently does occur in the wild, if we can confirm that the semantics
of this should be 'do archive', file a bug and I'll fix it.
--
Mark Sapiro <[email protected]> The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
_______________________________________________
Mailman-Developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Searchable Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
