--On 6 March 2008 13:02:01 -0500 Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The ideal thing would be if Mailman had an LMTP interface to accept
>> postings, and could make decisions about accepting mail after RCTP TO.
>
> MM3 will have LMTP, perhaps as the preferred way to get messages into th
--On 6 March 2008 19:43:04 + Nigel Metheringham
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 6 Mar 2008, at 17:51, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>> So, a 1-click unsub is a link in the message footer which takes you
>> to a
>> page that says something like "You've unsubscribed from our list,
>> sorry to
>> see y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 8, 2008, at 6:09 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> If you are a language champion or otherwise responsible for a Mailman
> translation, please get the updated 2.1.10 message catalog for your
> language to me as soon as possible. Mailman 2.1.10 has been
On Mar 7, 2008, at 1:03 PM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 10:49:08AM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I think the GFDL would probably be more appropriate:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html#FDL
I'm not as well versed on this license; what do people think about
that?
The majo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 8, 2008, at 12:34 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> OTOH, the only real advantage to GFDL is that we can borrow from other
> GFDLed docs. Do we want to do that?
YAGNI. Since our docs are already GPL'd, unless there's a reason to
switch or d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 10, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~amk/mailman/small-fixes
>
> I'll take a look tonight unless Mark beats me to it.
Actually, I found a few minutes to review this. The branch looks
good, +1 for me
On Friday 7 March 2008 19:03, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> The major issue with the GFDL is that for a while, Debian considered
> it to be a non-free license. I think the current status is that
> Debian now considers GFDL-licensed docs with no unmodifiable sections
> to be free, so we shouldn't have any
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:11:29PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Actually, I found a few minutes to review this. The branch looks
> good, +1 for merging it to 2.1.
Should I do a push to the 2.1 branch, or will you or Mark pull it into
2.1?
(I think I have commit privileges at this point, but I'
--On Monday, March 10, 2008 10:19 AM + Ian Eiloart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Yep, it would be the easiest way to integrate acceptance testing with
> Exim. It's common for sites to put Exim installations in front of
> Exchange servers (for security reasons), and do SMTP call forwards to
>
--On Friday, March 07, 2008 4:31 PM -0800 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I changed the last part. Take a look. Note that sitelist.cfg is
> irrelevant. It is intended to be used as input to bin/config_list to
> configure the site list ('mailman' list) more appropriately than the
> defaul
--On Friday, March 07, 2008 4:31 PM -0800 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Also, if you're happy with the way the new mm_handler is working, let
> me know, and I'll get it in the contrib directory for 2.1.10.
I'm seeing lines like the following in maillog. How do I trace the source
of t
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:02:12PM -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> In any case, I think the
>
> hre = re.compile('^>?\s*message-id:\s*(<.*>)', re.IGNORECASE)
>
> re will likely find anything to be found and is unlikely to find false
> hits.
Excellent point! I've written up a patch using the regex:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 10, 2008, at 1:03 PM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:11:29PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> Actually, I found a few minutes to review this. The branch looks
>> good, +1 for merging it to 2.1.
>
> Should I do a push to the 2.1
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:02:12PM -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>> In any case, I think the
>>
>> hre = re.compile('^>?\s*message-id:\s*(<.*>)', re.IGNORECASE)
>>
>> re will likely find anything to be found and is unlikely to find false
>> hits.
>
>Excellent point! I've writt
Barry Warsaw writes:
> YAGNI. Since our docs are already GPL'd, unless there's a reason to
> switch or dual license that overrides the hassle, let's just stick to
> GPL.
Yay! Another victory for the Sanity in Free Software movement!
___
Mailma
Kenneth Porter wrote:
>--On Friday, March 07, 2008 4:31 PM -0800 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>> Also, if you're happy with the way the new mm_handler is working, let
>> me know, and I'll get it in the contrib directory for 2.1.10.
>
>I'm seeing lines like the following in maillog. H
Hi,
I need to change the way mailman creates the list of
mail ids to deliver the mail, I tried locating the code which creates
the list of mail-id of a mailing list to send message but failed. Is
there any function or a code which creates the list of mail-ids to
deliver mail, it wo
Kenneth Porter wrote:
>
> Another approach is to dump the valid users list periodically using a
> Windows-based LDAP app and then copy that to the OSS front end MTA for
> validation. Check the MIMEDefang list archives for howto.
A bit off topic, but why not run the LDAP app on the OSS system? O
Prashanth wrote:
>
>I need to change the way mailman creates the list of
>mail ids to deliver the mail, I tried locating the code which creates
>the list of mail-id of a mailing list to send message but failed. Is
>there any function or a code which creates the list of mail-ids to
>
On 3/10/08, liste yoneticisi wrote:
> (An explanation to all: I just asked if there is anyone who
> responsible for Turkish translation of Mailman, attended to these lists
> from Turkiye.)
This is a question that is better asked on the mailman-i18n mailing
list. That's where all the Internat
Hello,
Currently I'm creating an unofficial site of GNU Mailman. It's not
done yet, but the goal is to make the current official site more
accessible and usable. The content is almost the same.
The unofficial site (since Google Page Creator doesn't support
folders, images are not shown and linked
--On Monday, March 10, 2008 6:18 PM -0700 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> In any case, my guess would be a permissions issue or a group mismatch
> from the mailman wrapper, but if everything is the same as with the
> previous mm-handler, then that should not be the case.
That looks like
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:11:29PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> Actually, I found a few minutes to review this. The branch looks
>> good, +1 for merging it to 2.1.
>
>Should I do a push to the 2.1 branch, or will you or Mark pull it into
>2.1?
>
>(I think I have commit pr
On 6-Mar-08, at 2:18 PM, Jason Pruim wrote:
> I've been watching this thread with interest and would like to help
> where I can... I don't know Python, so I can't exactly help program,
> but I've been told I can translate technological info into something
> the normal person could understand. So w
Kenneth Porter wrote:
>--On Friday, March 07, 2008 4:31 PM -0800 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>> I changed the last part. Take a look. Note that sitelist.cfg is
>> irrelevant. It is intended to be used as input to bin/config_list to
>> configure the site list ('mailman' list) more ap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Warsaw wrote:
| On Mar 7, 2008, at 1:03 PM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
|
|> * The README says Python 2.1 or later is required, but it looks like
|>Python 2.3 is actually needed these days.
|
| Yep. Mark, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believ
26 matches
Mail list logo
