Re: removal of the vacation package
Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org writes: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: Care to provide a pointer to an example? RFC 5230, sections 4.2, 4.5, 4.6 and 8. Thanks for the pointer. Are there any implementations of RFC 5230 in Debian? Both apt-cache search 5230 and apt-cache search sieve vacation only return libnet-sieve-script-perl, which is more of a toolbox than an actual sieve enabled MDA. Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k3e15r1w@nemi.mork.no
Re: removal of the vacation package
Quoting Bjørn Mork (2014-01-15 14:10:35) Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org writes: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: Care to provide a pointer to an example? RFC 5230, sections 4.2, 4.5, 4.6 and 8. Thanks for the pointer. Are there any implementations of RFC 5230 in Debian? Both apt-cache search 5230 and apt-cache search sieve vacation only return libnet-sieve-script-perl, which is more of a toolbox than an actual sieve enabled MDA. Package dovecot-sieve - RFC 5230 is listed as fully supported at upstream Homepage: http://pigeonhole.dovecot.org/ - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: removal of the vacation package
On 01/14/2014 01:58 PM, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org): With mailbot from courier-maildrop, it's easy to do for a .mailfilter file (though it'd be once per recipient, which is IMO enough, I don't You have an interesting definition of easy, Thomas..:-) My example is complicated, I admit. Never the less, mailbot isn't a hard thing to use. You don't have to use all the options. It's just a full example to give enough to eat to someone who wants to try. Cheers, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52d4fc8a.90...@debian.org
Re: removal of the vacation package
Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: Is there such a beast with feature parity? vacation has a few nice defaults, like ignoring list mails and only sending one message per week to each receiver. Having every end user implement similar behaviour in sieve isn't likely to happen. The world has become a lot more stupid since vacation was written The statement in the second paragraph is false. This also answers the first paragraph. Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87iotojmwy@deep-thought.43-1.org
Re: removal of the vacation package
Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org writes: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: Is there such a beast with feature parity? vacation has a few nice defaults, like ignoring list mails and only sending one message per week to each receiver. Having every end user implement similar behaviour in sieve isn't likely to happen. The world has become a lot more stupid since vacation was written The statement in the second paragraph is false. OK, then I got the wrong impression from the number of out of office messages I see on public mailing lists. This also answers the first paragraph. Care to provide a pointer to an example? Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ioto9s1p@nemi.mork.no
Re: removal of the vacation package
Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org writes: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: Is there such a beast with feature parity? vacation has a few nice defaults, like ignoring list mails and only sending one message per week to each receiver. Having every end user implement similar behaviour in sieve isn't likely to happen. The world has become a lot more stupid since vacation was written The statement in the second paragraph is false. OK, then I got the wrong impression from the number of out of office messages I see on public mailing lists. Yes. That might just be a larger sample size: your sample consists of people who are subscribed to public mailing lists. This number depends on time. This also answers the first paragraph. Care to provide a pointer to an example? RFC 5230, sections 4.2, 4.5, 4.6 and 8. Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8761pojkr6@deep-thought.43-1.org
Re: removal of the vacation package
On 01/13/2014 05:25 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
On Jan 12, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote:
It still seems to have a fair number of loyal users though. I see your
popcon says 1867 have it installed, but only 222 voted.
If we do have such a
replacement (I just don't know) please mention it in the removal bug
report.
I agree with waldi that the most simple replacement is a Sieve-enabled
LDA.
Is there such a beast with feature parity? vacation has a few nice
defaults, like ignoring list mails and only sending one message per week
to each receiver. Having every end user implement similar behaviour in
sieve isn't likely to happen.
With mailbot from courier-maildrop, it's easy to do for a .mailfilter
file (though it'd be once per recipient, which is IMO enough, I don't
see the point of the one per week feature):
RECIPIENT=$LOGNAME
RESPOND=~/.vacation.msg
RESPONDDB=~/.vacation.db
if ( ! /^Precedence: (bulk|list|junk)/ \
! /^List-Id:/ \
! /^List-Unsubscribe:/ \
! /^Return-Path:.*#@\[\]/ \
! /^Return-Path:.*/ \
! /^From:.*MAILER-DAEMON/ \
! /^X-ClamAV-Notice-Flag: *YES/ \
! /^Content-Type:.*message\/delivery-status/ \
! /^Subject:.*Delivery Status Notification/ \
! /^Subject:.*Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender/ \
! /^Subject:.*Delivery failure/ \
! /^Subject:.*Message delay/ \
! /^Subject:.*Mail Delivery Subsystem/ \
! /^Subject:.*Mail System Error.*Returned Mail/ \
! /^X-AutoReply.*/ \
! /^X-Mail-Autoreply.*/ \
! (/^Auto-Submitted:/ ! /^Auto-Submitted:\s*no/) \
! /^X-Spam-Flag: YES/ )
{
cc | mailbot -r '$RECIPIENT' -A 'Auto-Submitted: auto-replied' -t
$RESPOND -c 'UTF-8' -d $RESPONDDB -D 1 -A 'From: $RECIPIENT' -s 'Auto
Response: from $RECIPIENT' /usr/sbin/sendmail -f '' -t
}
This is for a .maildrop, though the same can be achieve with Sieve indeed...
if header :matches Subject * {
set oldsub : \${1};
}
if allof (
not header :contains Precedence [bulk,list,junk],
not header :contains List-Id [YES],
not header :contains List-Unsubscribe [YES],
not header :contains Return-path *#@\[\],
not header :contains Return-path *,
not header :contains From [*MAILER-DAEMON],
not header :contains Content-Type delivery-status,
not header :contains Subject *Delivery Status Notification,
not header :contains Subject *Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender,
not header :contains Subject *Delivery failure,
not header :contains Subject *Mail Delivery Subsystem,
not header :contains Subject *Mail System Error.*Returned Mail,
not header :contains X-AutoReply *,
not header :contains X-Mail-Autoreply *,
not allof (
exists Auto-Submitted,
not header :matches Auto-Submitted no
),
not header :contains X-ClamAV-Notice-Flag [YES],
not header :contains X-Spam-Flag [YES] ) {
vacation :days 2 :addresses [$recipient] :subject Auto Response from
$recipient\${oldsub}
text:
$vacation_text
.
;}
The world has become a lot more stupid since vacation was written
Which is why it's very nice to talk about this on a public list, and why
I'm posting this answer! :)
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52d3b73f.7090...@debian.org
Re: removal of the vacation package
Marco d'Itri writes (Re: removal of the vacation package): On Jan 12, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote: The set of bugs looks tractable to me. Do you have a half-prepared upload somewhere or is the versionn in the archive the most recent ? No, I have really ignored it since december 2003. If you want it, it's yours. OK. I will take it. Would you prefer me to do an upload right away to change the Maintainer or can it wait (weeks very likely) until I've had a chance to do some actual work on it ? If anyone else wants to help please let me know, but it doesn't look like a big problem to me. Thanks, Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21203.58812.492283.357...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: removal of the vacation package
On Jan 13, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote: OK. I will take it. Would you prefer me to do an upload right away to change the Maintainer or can it wait (weeks very likely) until I've had a chance to do some actual work on it ? No hurry. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of the vacation package
Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org): With mailbot from courier-maildrop, it's easy to do for a .mailfilter file (though it'd be once per recipient, which is IMO enough, I don't You have an interesting definition of easy, Thomas..:-) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of the vacation package
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 03:22:59AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: It does not support MIME and a lot of other things that are required to be a good citizen in today's Internet, so unless somebody has some really compelling arguments to keep it around and wants to adopt it I will request removal from the archive. It still seems to have a fair number of loyal users though. I see your points, but I wonder if we do have a decent replacement for it to suggest to our users. A replacement that is better than trying to mimic vacation by hand in procmail, and doing it wrong; arguably doing so will contribute to be even worse email citizens. If we do have such a replacement (I just don't know) please mention it in the removal bug report. Thanks for having maintained vacation over all these years! Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of the vacation package
Marco d'Itri writes (removal of the vacation package): I stopped maintaining it years ago and nobody ever bothered to ask me about it... It does not support MIME and a lot of other things that are required to be a good citizen in today's Internet, so unless somebody has some really compelling arguments to keep it around and wants to adopt it I will request removal from the archive. I might want to adopt it. What's wrong with it not supporting MIME ? AFAIAA it doesn't need to do much parsing of the incoming messages. The set of bugs looks tractable to me. Do you have a half-prepared upload somewhere or is the versionn in the archive the most recent ? Thanks, Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21202.28038.11801.409...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: removal of the vacation package
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 11:00:45AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: but I wonder if we do have a decent replacement for it to suggest to our users. Dovecot LDA supports Sieve and die vacation extension. Not sure if we have other stand-alone replacements. Bastian -- Emotions are alien to me. I'm a scientist. -- Spock, This Side of Paradise, stardate 3417.3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140112101838.ga11...@mail.waldi.eu.org
Re: removal of the vacation package
On Jan 12, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote: It still seems to have a fair number of loyal users though. I see your popcon says 1867 have it installed, but only 222 voted. If we do have such a replacement (I just don't know) please mention it in the removal bug report. I agree with waldi that the most simple replacement is a Sieve-enabled LDA. On Jan 12, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote: I might want to adopt it. What's wrong with it not supporting MIME ? AFAIAA it doesn't need to do much parsing of the incoming messages. As the last bug shows, it is supposed to parse the Subject header. The set of bugs looks tractable to me. Do you have a half-prepared upload somewhere or is the versionn in the archive the most recent ? No, I have really ignored it since december 2003. If you want it, it's yours. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: removal of the vacation package
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes: On Jan 12, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote: It still seems to have a fair number of loyal users though. I see your popcon says 1867 have it installed, but only 222 voted. If we do have such a replacement (I just don't know) please mention it in the removal bug report. I agree with waldi that the most simple replacement is a Sieve-enabled LDA. Is there such a beast with feature parity? vacation has a few nice defaults, like ignoring list mails and only sending one message per week to each receiver. Having every end user implement similar behaviour in sieve isn't likely to happen. The world has become a lot more stupid since vacation was written On Jan 12, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote: I might want to adopt it. What's wrong with it not supporting MIME ? AFAIAA it doesn't need to do much parsing of the incoming messages. As the last bug shows, it is supposed to parse the Subject header. This doesn't look like a MIME bug to me. It looks like vacation truncates multiline subjects. There is absolutely no reason it should try to parse any MIME. And the truncation doesn't really matter for most use cases (returning a static message). IMHO this could just be documented and tagged as wontfix if you wanted to. The set of bugs looks tractable to me. Do you have a half-prepared upload somewhere or is the versionn in the archive the most recent ? No, I have really ignored it since december 2003. If you want it, it's yours. Good to see that there are developers interested in keeping it alive. Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vbxoao4p@nemi.mork.no
Re: removal of the vacation package
Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: This doesn't look like a MIME bug to me. It looks like vacation truncates multiline subjects. There is absolutely no reason it should try to parse any MIME. Well, if you include the subject in the reply, it would nice if it would undo RFC 2047 encoding and then declare the right charset in the body. But this is relatively minor. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zjn0o2rc@windlord.stanford.edu
removal of the vacation package
I stopped maintaining it years ago and nobody ever bothered to ask me about it... It does not support MIME and a lot of other things that are required to be a good citizen in today's Internet, so unless somebody has some really compelling arguments to keep it around and wants to adopt it I will request removal from the archive. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
