On Monday, 6 March 2017 22:46:13 CET Alberto Luaces wrote:
> Please
>
> s/per6/perl6/g
Oops... Sure. Thanks for the heads-up.
--
https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/
http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mirko Tietgen
* Package name: libmarc-spec-perl
Version : 0.1.2
Upstream Author : Carsten Klee
* URL : https://metacpan.org/pod/MARC::Spec
* License : Artistic, GPL v1+
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : A "MAR
Dominique Dumont writes:
> Package: wnpp
> Owner: Dominique Dumont
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> * Package name: zef
> Version : 0.001
> Upstream Author : Nick Logan nlo...@gmail.com
> * URL : https://github.com/ugexe/zef
> * L
Hi there,
first of all, thanks Simon for your work.
On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 17:33:44 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Could you try to explain to me why one would need the same liberties for
> > source code and standard documents?
>
> Among many other reasons:
Thanks Josh for lis
On 14603 March 1977, Geert Stappers wrote:
>> The debian lists work. Alioth currently wouldn't, I think, but software
>> could be upgraded.
>> It has a different problem which is way worse: It breaks usual alias
>> type forwarders, which are used *a lot* within Debian.
> What are the ideas about c
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Alessio Treglia
* Package name: tendermint-go-data
Version : 0.0~git20170228.0.3227114-1
Upstream Author : Tendermint
* URL : https://github.com/tendermint/go-data
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Go
Descripti
Package: wnpp
Owner: Dominique Dumont
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: zef
Version : 0.001
Upstream Author : Nick Logan nlo...@gmail.com
* URL : https://github.com/ugexe/zef
* License : Artistic-2
Programming Lang
Hello,
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.
On 22/02/2017 04:30, Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu) wrote:
> Dear Mehdi,
>
> I'd like to propose OCF.tw to be a Trusted Organization.
> And OCF.tw also have the interests to be in. But I don't know how to start.
> We've both read
> https://wiki.debian.or
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 05:58:02PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> I presume this issue arises because people (myself included) dislike the
> fact that in order to install some RFCs and/or GNU documentation one has
> to flick a switch that also opens the door to some thoroughly
> proprietary software.
Josh Triplett writes:
> Iustin Pop wrote:
>> On 2017-03-05 12:41:18, Ben Finney wrote:
>> > Sebastiaan Couwenberg writes:
>> > > I'd like to see a compromise in the DFSG like #4 for standards to
>> > > allow their inclusion in Debian when their license at least allows
>> > > modification when ch
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 11:09:37AM -0500, Christopher Clements wrote:
> I have mutt configured to let me edit the headers along with the
> message, but I thought that stuff like the "To:" field were read by SMTP
> servers to determine where to deliver the message, sort of like post
> office relay b
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 05:01:40PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
Christopher Clements writes:
...
That then provokes a small fraction of the victims to shout at us,
because they don't know ho to read headers.
That is what you are seeing.
Are you saying that these messages were not sent to
and
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 12:26:00PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
Christopher Clements writes:
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 09:55:14AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
Christopher Clements writes:
On closer examination, I think you are correct in saying that the
replies are written by the spammer as well.
Christopher Clements writes:
...
>>That then provokes a small fraction of the victims to shout at us,
>>because they don't know ho to read headers.
>>
>>That is what you are seeing.
>
> Are you saying that these messages were not sent to
> and relayed to subscribers, but were
> instead forged to
On Mon, 06 Mar 2017, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Mar 2017, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Saturday 2015-11-07, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > > The Debian Project now has an XMPP service available to all Debian
> > > Developers. Your Debian.org email identity can be used as your
On Mon, 06 Mar 2017, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Saturday 2015-11-07, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > The Debian Project now has an XMPP service available to all Debian
> > Developers. Your Debian.org email identity can be used as your XMPP
> > address.
>
> Unfortunately, as of a few weeks ago
Hi,
On Saturday 2015-11-07, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> The Debian Project now has an XMPP service available to all Debian
> Developers. Your Debian.org email identity can be used as your XMPP
> address.
Unfortunately, as of a few weeks ago, spammers have started to send messages
through the debian.o
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On March 5, 2017 3:08:49 PM EST, Vincent Danjean wrote:
>>Le 05/03/2017 à 16:29, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
>>> That would be the next step, DMARC, which is SPF plus DKIM plus some
>>> extra DNS records. And DMARC then allow to tell other
Processing control commands:
> forwarded -1 https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko/issues/172
Bug #694308 [general] A lot of type 1 fonts include Adobe all right reserved
code
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
'https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko/issues/172'.
--
694308: http://bugs.debi
control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/afdko/issues/172
Christopher Clements writes:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 09:55:14AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
>>Christopher Clements writes:
>>> On closer examination, I think you are correct in saying that the
>>> replies are written by the spammer as well.
>>
>>On closer examination of what?
>
> The "To:" fiel
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 04:29:22PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 14602 March 1977, Philip Hands wrote:
>
> > I guess we could help the mail servers of the recipients of the initial
> > messages make that decision if we did SPF for debian.org, but I guess
> > that the lack of SPF probably indica
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 07:55:39AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 14602 March 1977, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> >> That would be the next step, DMARC, which is SPF plus DKIM plus some
> >> extra DNS records. And DMARC then allow to tell other mail servers (that
> >> follow DMARC) to get rid (spamfil
On Sun, 05 Mar 2017, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On March 5, 2017 3:08:49 PM EST, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> >Le 05/03/2017 à 16:29, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> >> That would be the next step, DMARC, which is SPF plus DKIM plus some
> >> extra DNS records. And DMARC then allow to tell other mail s
On Sun 05/Mar/2017 21:08:49 +0100 Vincent Danjean wrote:
I was under the impression that DMARC plays very bad with mailing lists. If
I recall correctly, mailman has to modify mails that come from a DMARC
domain.
Your impression is correct. However, there's nothing that Debian can do or
omit
25 matches
Mail list logo
