Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
On 12/02/2019 16:26, Eitan Adler wrote: > (please make sure to add me to CC directly as the mailing is presently broken) > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:47, Mark Thomas wrote: >> >> -1 >> >> Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message >> threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk >> of harm to the community that that represents. > > Can you present any evidence that this would be actively harmful to > the community to point that we should violate internet standards? > I've seen nothing similar happen in any of other open source > communities I'm a part of. I've seen it happen in multiple communities where conversations move off-list accidentally and one of the participants notices and fixes it. What I can't put a figure on is how many times it isn't noticed because the thread doesn't re-appear on list. It didn't take much searching to find others with a similar experience: http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-useful.html In terms of RFC 2822, I read the spec differently and consider qmail's changing of the reply-to header consistent with both the intent of the RFC and the desire of the ASF. I am aware of the long running debates on this point. (here is the opposite PoV to the link above: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html) Personally, I do not want two copies of every reply to every message I post to this or any other ASF list. It happens enough already when folks hit reply all. Having it happen every time would be a significant nuisance. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 16:26, Eitan Adler wrote: > > (please make sure to add me to CC directly as the mailing is presently broken) > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:47, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > > -1 > > > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > > of harm to the community that that represents. > > Can you present any evidence that this would be actively harmful to > the community to point that we should violate internet standards? > I've seen nothing similar happen in any of other open source > communities I'm a part of. >From my reading of RFC 2822, it's perfectly legitimate to provide a Reply-To address to override the From: address. In any case, we definitely need the Reply-To header for lists such as commits, issues, notifications. If we were to change only dev@ etc, then the behaviour on those lists would be different - that seems confusing to me. > -- > Eitan Adler > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
(please make sure to add me to CC directly as the mailing is presently broken) On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:47, Mark Thomas wrote: > > -1 > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > of harm to the community that that represents. Can you present any evidence that this would be actively harmful to the community to point that we should violate internet standards? I've seen nothing similar happen in any of other open source communities I'm a part of. -- Eitan Adler - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 11:16, sebb a écrit : > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit : > > > > > > I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either > > > to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and > > > notifications@ > > > > I had a look at that too. > > But IMO > > * "dev" and > > * "commits", "notifications", ... > > are different cases in that the former relays messages that originated > > from real people while the latter comes from a "bot" and it would make > > no sense to reply to it. > > Yes. That's deliberate, for the reason you state. > The point is that all the lists have Reply-To set. Sorry, I don't follow the reasoning; why should the setting be the same for two different cases? > > Gilles > > > > > > > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:47, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > > > > > > -1 > > > > > > > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > > > > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > > > > of harm to the community that that represents. > > > > > > > > I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any > > > > of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) > > > > > > > > On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly > > > > > set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List > > > > > . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the > > > > > reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making > > > > > this change. > > > > > > > > > > This is broken for multiple reasons. > > > > > > > > > > It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used > > > > > for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be > > > > > sent." > > > > > > > > > > While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the > > > > > reasoning the standard is the way it is: > > > > > > > > > > - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even > > > > > "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases > > > > > the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing > > > > > lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using > > > > > the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. > > > > > > > > I don't see this. > > > > > > > > Reply - > original poster > > > > Reply List -> list > > > > Reply All -> List and OP > > > > > > > > > - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still > > > > > possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list > > > > > > > > No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. > > > > > > > > > - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only > > > > > triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks > > > > > this. > > > > > - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, > > > > > especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal > > > > > mail. > > > > > > > > Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the > > > > OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no > > > > way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. > > > > > > > > Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of > > > > interest . > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list > > > > > > > > > > +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed > > > > > -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Eitan Adler > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 3:47 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > > -1 > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > of harm to the community that that represents. > > I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any > of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) > I’m with Mark here. -Rob >> On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly >> set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List >> . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the >> reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making >> this change. >> >> This is broken for multiple reasons. >> >> It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used >> for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be >> sent." >> >> While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the >> reasoning the standard is the way it is: >> >> - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even >> "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases >> the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing >> lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using >> the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. > > I don't see this. > > Reply - > original poster > Reply List -> list > Reply All -> List and OP > >> - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still >> possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list > > No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. > >> - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only >> triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks >> this. >> - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, >> especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal >> mail. > > Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the > OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no > way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. > > Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of interest . > > Mark > > >> As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list >> >> +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed >> -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken >> >> -- >> Eitan Adler >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 09:24, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > Hi. > > Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit : > > > > I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either > > to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and > > notifications@ > > I had a look at that too. > But IMO > * "dev" and > * "commits", "notifications", ... > are different cases in that the former relays messages that originated > from real people while the latter comes from a "bot" and it would make > no sense to reply to it. Yes. That's deliberate, for the reason you state. The point is that all the lists have Reply-To set. > Gilles > > > > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:47, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > > > > -1 > > > > > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > > > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > > > of harm to the community that that represents. > > > > > > I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any > > > of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) > > > > > > On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly > > > > set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List > > > > . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the > > > > reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making > > > > this change. > > > > > > > > This is broken for multiple reasons. > > > > > > > > It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used > > > > for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be > > > > sent." > > > > > > > > While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the > > > > reasoning the standard is the way it is: > > > > > > > > - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even > > > > "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases > > > > the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing > > > > lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using > > > > the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. > > > > > > I don't see this. > > > > > > Reply - > original poster > > > Reply List -> list > > > Reply All -> List and OP > > > > > > > - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still > > > > possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list > > > > > > No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. > > > > > > > - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only > > > > triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks > > > > this. > > > > - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, > > > > especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal > > > > mail. > > > > > > Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the > > > OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no > > > way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. > > > > > > Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of interest > > > . > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list > > > > > > > > +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed > > > > -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Eitan Adler > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
Hi. Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 10:02, sebb a écrit : > > I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either > to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and > notifications@ I had a look at that too. But IMO * "dev" and * "commits", "notifications", ... are different cases in that the former relays messages that originated from real people while the latter comes from a "bot" and it would make no sense to reply to it. Gilles > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:47, Mark Thomas wrote: > > > > -1 > > > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > > of harm to the community that that represents. > > > > I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any > > of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) > > > > On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly > > > set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List > > > . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the > > > reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making > > > this change. > > > > > > This is broken for multiple reasons. > > > > > > It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used > > > for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be > > > sent." > > > > > > While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the > > > reasoning the standard is the way it is: > > > > > > - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even > > > "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases > > > the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing > > > lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using > > > the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. > > > > I don't see this. > > > > Reply - > original poster > > Reply List -> list > > Reply All -> List and OP > > > > > - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still > > > possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list > > > > No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. > > > > > - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only > > > triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks > > > this. > > > - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, > > > especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal > > > mail. > > > > Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the > > OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no > > way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. > > > > Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of interest . > > > > Mark > > > > > > > As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list > > > > > > +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed > > > -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken > > > > > > -- > > > Eitan Adler > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
Hello. Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 09:47, Mark Thomas a écrit : > > -1 > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > of harm to the community that that represents. > > I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any > of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) Using the Gmail webmail interface, the issues seem present. > > On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly > > set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List > > . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the > > reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making > > this change. > > > > This is broken for multiple reasons. > > > > It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used > > for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be > > sent." > > > > While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the > > reasoning the standard is the way it is: > > > > - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even > > "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases > > the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing > > lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using > > the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. > > I don't see this. > > Reply - > original poster In Gmail -> list > Reply List -> list In Gmail, does not appear in the reply options. > Reply All -> List and OP In Gmail -> list > > - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still > > possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list > > No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. For sure, some MUA are better than others. But the question is whether the list configuration violates the standard or not. This article: http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html argues that "reply-to" set to list is always bad. Gilles > > - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only > > triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks > > this. > > - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, > > especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal > > mail. > > Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the > OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no > way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. > > Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of interest . > > Mark > > > > As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list > > > > +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed > > -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken > > > > -- > > Eitan Adler > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
I checked a few other ASF lists and they all have Reply-To set either to the current list or to dev@ for lists such as commits@ and notifications@ On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:47, Mark Thomas wrote: > > -1 > > Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message > threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk > of harm to the community that that represents. > > I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any > of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) > > On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly > > set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List > > . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the > > reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making > > this change. > > > > This is broken for multiple reasons. > > > > It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used > > for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be > > sent." > > > > While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the > > reasoning the standard is the way it is: > > > > - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even > > "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases > > the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing > > lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using > > the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. > > I don't see this. > > Reply - > original poster > Reply List -> list > Reply All -> List and OP > > > - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still > > possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list > > No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. > > > - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only > > triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks > > this. > > - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, > > especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal > > mail. > > Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the > OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no > way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. > > Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of interest . > > Mark > > > > As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list > > > > +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed > > -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken > > > > -- > > Eitan Adler > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Re: [vote] fix the misconfiguration of the dev@ mailing list
-1 Changing the reply-to configuration increases the chances of message threads being moved off-list by accident. I am concerned about the risk of harm to the community that that represents. I vote to leave the current list configuration as it. I do not see any of the issues described. (I'm using Thunderbird.) On 11/02/2019 08:24, Eitan Adler wrote: > Hi all, > > The mailing list dev@commons.apache.org appears to always and forcibly > set the header Reply-To: Commons Developers List > . I had asked INFRA to remove this remove the > reply-to munging. They asked for documented consensus before making > this change. > > This is broken for multiple reasons. > > It violates RFC 2822 which requires that reply-to MUST only be used > for when " ... the author of the message suggests that replies be > sent." > > While this should be enough, it is useful to explain some of the > reasoning the standard is the way it is: > > - It breaks MUAs that have "reply to all" and "reply" (and maybe even > "reply to list"). In doing so, having this setting greatly increases > the chance of privacy violations by people that expect the mailing > lists to act normally. If you're trying to send a private reply using > the normal method to reply, the message will be made public. I don't see this. Reply - > original poster Reply List -> list Reply All -> List and OP > - It adds nothing: by means of copy and paste a private reply is still > possible, just annoying, and a workaround for a broken mailing list No need for this workaround in Thunderbird. > - Some mail readers provide 'personal mail' indicators. This only > triggered when you are on the CC or TO lines. The 'feature' breaks > this. > - Some people prefer mail CCed to them as well as the mailing list, > especially if reading a mailing list is lower priority than personal > mail. Both the above require that replies are sent to both the list and the OP. While some people might prefer this, others do not. And we have no way of telling which list subscribers fall into which camp. Mail clients usually have other ways to mark threads that are of interest . Mark > As such I'd like to vote that we fix the dev@ mailing list > > +1 = the mailing list misconfiguration will be removed > -1 = the mailing list will continue to remain broken > > -- > Eitan Adler > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
