Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mailman 2.X CVS MAIN is back

On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 01:38, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > I've done backporting the changes in Release_2_1-maint into the MAIN > branch which was not updated more than a year and this has caused > confusion for the people who want to try CVS checkout. For I was a > little bit tired of maintaining two b

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mailman 2.X CVS MAIN is back

On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 12:33, John W. Baxter wrote: > It seems to me that the improved email module is enough reason to require > Python 2.4. (We moved our email processing to 2.4 for that reason.) 'Zackly! -Barry signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part _

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mailman 2.X CVS MAIN is back

On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 14:52, Bryan Fullerton wrote: > I'm sure there will be some complaints from people running > "Enterprise" operating systems that are locked at older versions of > Python. These could be alleviated if there was critical issue support > for a MM2.1 maintenance branch for some p

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mailman 2.X CVS MAIN is back

On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 04:03, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > The default python version in Debian is still 2.3, so I would really > like 2.3 to be supported for MM2.2. I'm a Gentoo users myself, so I'm not really up on Debian's processes and schedules. However I did check a few other OSes that I had la

Re: [Mailman-Developers] LDAP-based list

On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 13:51, Mark Sapiro wrote: > You have to insure that calls to getMembers(), getRegularMemberKeys(), > etc. go to the LDAP directory each time and don't rely on previously > retrieved information. > > Either that or perhaps set up a cron to do 'bin/mailmanctl restart' > period

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Dealing with DomainKeys and DKIM

On Sat, 2005-09-10 at 15:03, Joe Peterson wrote: > Anyway, since I run a Mailman system too, I figured this might be a > problem. Indeed it is, since the header lines get passed through, and > when the check is done, it indicates a failure. DomainKeys recommends > mail lists regenerate the keys

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mal Formed MIME post leakedthrough to list

On Sat, 2005-09-17 at 12:12, Mark Sapiro wrote: > I confirmed that the post e-mail was clearly wrong. RFC2046 states "The > boundary delimiter MUST NOT appear inside any of the encapsulated > parts, on a line by itself or as the prefix of any line." That > notwithstanding, I think the parser and M

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mal Formed MIME post leakedthrough to list

On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 17:34, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > I think we can write more intuitive and robust code like this: > > if mlist.max_message_size > 0: > bodylen = len(msg.as_string().split('\n\n',1)[1]) The only problem with that is that it's not very efficient to turn the message b

Re: [Mailman-Developers] structural problem with MemberAdapter

On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 18:07, John Dennis wrote: > Good news, bad news: good news is I've implemented a LDAP based > membership adapter that implements the complete MemberAdapter interface > (the previous LDAP adapter was incomplete and limited in application). > In stand alone testing my adapter se

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Patch submitted

On Fri, 2005-09-23 at 16:10, Bjorn-Erik Townsend wrote: > I submitted a small patch just now for Bug 1212066 (lack of date header > in new list notification emails), a cosmetic issue which was annoying me > (and setting off my spam filters). The website suggests sending an > email to this list

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Debugging lost messages?

On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 12:39, Brad Knowles wrote: > But I'm not seeing any details as to why a message is being > discarded or bouncing. I see two more messages that came in today to > the list in question, and by matching message-ids and listnames > between the Mailman "vette" log and th

[Mailman-Developers] The Mailman FAQ wizard (temporarily unavailable)

The Python.org administrators have moved the website to our spiffy new server, however the Mailman FAQ wizard hasn't yet been moved. It should be shortly. Please try not to make any changes to the FAQ wizard for the next day or so. Currently, until your DNS updates, you'll be hitting the wizard

Re: [Mailman-Developers] The Mailman FAQ wizard (temporarily unavailable)

On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 13:16, Barry Warsaw wrote: > The Python.org administrators have moved the website to our spiffy new > server, however the Mailman FAQ wizard hasn't yet been moved. It should > be shortly. > > Please try not to make any changes to the FAQ wizard for

Re: [Mailman-Developers] XMLRPC Patch

On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 12:25, Joshua Ginsberg wrote: > I'm developing a patch to add an XMLRPC-based management interface to > Mailman. Would this be something that you would be interested in trying > to incorporate in the 2.1.x branch? Thanks! Josh, thanks very much for this patch (and thanks for

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3?

On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 08:07, Mike Burton wrote: > I have been watching with anticipation, but it's been a while since I > have heard anything on MM3. Any noteworthy updates? Sadly, no. My job has been incredible time consuming so I just haven't had much time to work on MM3. If things go well,

Re: [Mailman-Developers] XMLRPC Patch

On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 16:23, Joshua Ginsberg wrote: > Does anybody have any feedback on this patch? Is it something that can > be committed? Thanks! I'd really like to look at this in more detail, but because of work constraints, I won't be able to spend any time on it until later in this month.

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 13:12 -0400, Adrian Wells wrote: > Hello. How might one configure Mailman (version 2.1.6) list settings > using PHP scripts? Wow, this thread opened up a can of worms. :) Since I'm sitting here waiting for some compiles, I'll try to answer them as best I can. First, the tec

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

And now for the political answers... ;) On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 16:30 -0500, Kevin McCann wrote: > I don't mean to be a pessimist, but I don't think this will ever happen. I hope this isn't the case, but realistically, things have to change before we're going to make significant progress. I hope

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 23:49 -0500, Kevin McCann wrote: > This kind of response is precisely what makes me realize there is a huge > disconnect between people who run mailing lists and ONLY want to run > mailing lists and those who want to have a mailing list be a critical > component of somethi

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 09:00 -0600, Brad Knowles wrote: > I'm not sure I understand. Are you talking about integrating the > MTA into Mailman, so that it can directly access the list of allowed > senders for a given mailing list and take appropriate action for > other addresses before act

[Mailman-Developers] Ubuntu/Launchpad Rosetta for i18n translations?

Hello translators, In what will hopefully be just the first of several improvements to the Mailman development process, I would like to get some feedback from the i18n developers on moving translation coordination to Rosetta. Rosetta is part of Ubuntu's Launchpad and while I haven't played around

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 12:57 +, Ian Eiloart wrote: > Let's be clear. The *requirement* is that my MTA should never accept > an email that isn't going to prove undeliverable. Currently there are > two main reasons why it might: a full mailbox, or a Mailman rule. I'm > agnostic as to how th

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MTA Integration (was PHP Wrappers?)

On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 15:27 -0500, Robby Griffin wrote: > > OK, the MTA should ONLY accept email that it can deliver. > > FWIW, Mailman currently avoids doing anything about this for a > documented reason (scripts/post): Right, and AFAIK all major MTAs now support the maildir format. The plan

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 01:36 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > The problem isn't really that pickles are Python-specific, that's what > Fred Brooks would call an "accidental" obstacle. You're right, we > could, at a fairly predictable amount of effort, convert from a > Python-specific data store

Re: [Mailman-Developers] PHP Wrappers?

On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 17:18 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > "Brad" == Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > To get all the way to "MTA doesn't accept anything that MM is going to > refuse to deliver", yes. But we certainly could define an interface > to an auxiliary service such th

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-i18n] Ubuntu/Launchpad Rosetta for i18n translations?

On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 22:34 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > The thing that worries me (as a TP coordinator) about Rosetta and open > translation processes is the legal copyright issues. In principle, each > translator has the copyright to the translation, so the translator would > need to do lic

[Mailman-Developers] A better way of doing templates?

Jordi Mallach brings up a good point on the rosetta-users mailing list, in response to my queries there. Rosetta doesn't really work with non-po files, so the fact that we have templates that need translating will cause us some grief. Well, even more grief than it has over the years. ;) Does any

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Make web_page_url visible in the admin GUI?

On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 19:03 +, Max Bowsher wrote: > OPTION TWO: Make links and form action URLs within the admin interface > relative, so that an incorrect web_page_url does not render the admin > interface inoperable. I think ultimately, it would be great if the urls could all be relative, b

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Make web_page_url visible in the admin GUI?

On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 13:16 -0800, JC Dill wrote: > As I understand it, your issue is what URL is "shown". My suggestion is > that we make a change to the code that allows list administrators to > change what URL is "shown" to list users. The new URL will also work > for list administrators,

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Make web_page_url visible in the admin GUI?

On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 11:57 +, Max Bowsher wrote: > Can you elaborate? > > I'd quite like to have a go at fixing this, but obviously I'd rather not > spend time on it if there are reasons I haven't thought about which > would make such a patch unacceptable. I don't remember too many details,

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Pipermail threading and Debian bug 167758

On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 12:22 +, Max Bowsher wrote: > Was there ever any previous discussion about this issue, or did the > Debian folks not raise the issue upstream? I don't remember anything specific, but it's certainly possible that the issue's been raised before. -Barry signature.asc De

Re: [Mailman-Developers] A better way of doing templates?

On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 10:44 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > How about adding current templates into pot/po and pickup and generate > language templates during "make install." I don't know if it could be > done at all but I will look at it this weekend. I see that this is checked in, which I guess

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Spam/Scam button

On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 14:33 +0200, Rui Correia wrote: > I've just been cleaning up a list that I administer and suddenly it came to > me that we could have a report Scam/Spam button for such items being sent to > Mailman lists. A long while ago, I did an experimental integration of Spambayes wit

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Spam/Scam button

On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 16:38 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > I think you are talking about: > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1008865&group_id=103&atid=300103 > > Hopefully, we will be back to the MAIN CVS tree for the development of > mailman-2.2 after the release of 2.1.7

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Spam/Scam button

On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 10:21 +, Ian Eiloart wrote: > There is an extension to Thunderbird which supports List- header URLs. > Turns them into clickable links. I'm not sure whether it would work for a > new List- header - it might look for only the RFC 2369 defined List- > headers. > > Of co

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] filename too long error - stopping list

On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 09:22 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > May be we should set this default in Defaults.py.in in the next release > of 2.1.7. Thoughts? It's probably a good idea, but also as Stephen says, it might be a good idea to shorten the filename (keeping the extension) even when this valu

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 18:56 -0800, JC Dill wrote: > The main problem I think Rocky is experiencing is the problem of absent > moderators, period. Rather than some automated method of turning the > moderator tasks over to others, I suggest that a better way is to more > closely oversee pending

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 22:22 -0600, Brad Knowles wrote: > Okay, now that is truly weird. I thought it was kind of > off-topic myself, but I thought that it would be one that either you > or Barry would have approved of, so I approved it on that basis. I definitely think it's on-topic for

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

First let me say that I think JC and Brad are doing a great job moderating the lists, and I /greatly/ appreciate their help with this! Second, I think there's one more use case that might work well for general help lists like mailman-users (but not mailman-developers). There should be a way for no

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 12:15 -0500, R. Bernstein wrote: > ***If I have this correct, where GNU mailman seems to differ from say > sourceforge bug and feature trackers is that in GNU Mailman where > there is a password associated with a moderator and an administrator > *account*, in sourceforge trac

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 22:10 -0600, Brad Knowles wrote: > But then we're getting dangerously close to tools like Active > Spam Killer or TMDA, which I am generally violently opposed to. I think they're different use cases. My main problem with such tools is when people email me first, I tr

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 22:05 -0600, Brad Knowles wrote: > For the larger ones, I'd like to see something like Skip's > "mmfold.py" script that could run locally on the same server where > the lists are located, so that no use of a web browser is required, > and so that the program could di

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 12:21 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > BAW> I find that my typical approach is to scan the summary, > BAW> opening any potential ham > > I assume you mean "ham = on-topic, spam = off-topic, possibly but not > necessarily UCE"? In this context, yep! > Our lists d

Re: [Mailman-Developers] On allowing any list member to be an email moderator

On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 09:09 +, Nigel Metheringham wrote: > its a form so not quite like that - try > http://lists.DOMAIN.TLD/lists/admindb/LIST?adminpw=yourpassword > > Personally I have a bookmarks folder within Firefox with all the lists I > handle as bookmarks within that set up with pas

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Serious Archiving problem in 2.1.7

On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 08:58 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote: > The purpose of this post is twofold. First, I would like independent > review of the patch, as I still don't fully understand the reason for > the error in all cases and the i18n implications. I'll try to find some time to do this, if Tokio

Re: [Mailman-Developers] preferred documentation format, sources for documentation in admin/www

On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 16:57 +0100, Joost van Baal wrote: > I'd like to document my patch for making Mailman OpenPGP and S/MIME > aware ( http://non-gnu.uvt.nl/pub/mailman/ ). I'd like this > documentation to integrate nicely with the official Mailman > documenation. What is the preferred format

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Serious Archiving problem in 2.1.7

On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 12:00 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > I really hate to read code in the Archiver directory. :-( > We'd rather develope new archiver from scratch for 2.2 (or 3.0). New > design should be in XHTML/CSS/UTF-8. Oh most definitely. The current archiver is a bastard bolt-on from a

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-i18n] A better way of doing templates?

On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 13:08 +0100, Bjørn Vermo wrote: > May I suggest a zero-lingual base version? The only way to make software > truly language independent is to avoid the concept of a "default language". > If everybody has to get a language file, developers will be forced to > think about l

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Inactivity deletion of maillist users ?

On Jan 12, 2006, at 8:51 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Joshua Ginsberg wrote: >> >> Perhaps an interesting compromise might be to add to config.pck a key >> "last_post" whose value is a dictionary of email:time 9-tuple pairs. >> That way, folks like Erling could write a script to go ahead and >> do

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Problems with uuencoded attachments

On Jan 14, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > Mark Sapiro wrote: > > >>> File "/usr/lib/python2.3/uu.py", line 139, in decode >>> sys.stderr.write("Warning: %s\n" % str(v)) >>> File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Logging/MultiLogger.py", line 45, >>> in write >>> _logexc(logger, msg) >>> Fi

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Dealing with DomainKeys and DKIM

On Jan 15, 2006, at 11:10 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Brad Knowles wrote: >> >> Did you check Mailman version 2.1.7? It was released recently >> and I believe that handling DomainKeys/DKIM was one of the things >> that was addressed. > > Brad is correct, but it is addressed exactly as described

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Problems with uuencoded attachments

On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 09:25 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > In usual mailman qrunner execs, stderr is logged into logs/errors. It > is the additional tee_to_real_stderr in LogStdErr() setting which wants > to print the error into real stderr. > > Isn't it safe to put the tee_to_real_stderr value

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [ mailman-Bugs-1416853 ] Jan 14 change to Handlers/SpamDetect.py isincomplete

On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 14:30 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Actually, as you implicitly point out, this isn't necessary since only > list posts should be in the moderation queue in the first place. The > only other messages that currently get held are messages to the owner > that get caught by a Spam

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] any info onthisreportedexploit?

On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 19:26 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote: > I seem to be having a lot of trouble with this. Make that > > if t and not t[7]: > t = t[:7] + (1,) +t[8:] If you look at email 3.0, the 7th item returned from parsedate() and parsedate_tz() is always 1, obviously so that the va

Re: [Mailman-Developers] incorrect generated HTML

On Feb 28, 2006, at 6:52 PM, Giuliano Gavazzi wrote: > I see now that there is a General Web UI item in the TODO. Let me add > a plea: please do not use php for the future UI! Don't worry, that won't happen. What might/should eventually happen is the adoption of a decent Python templating engi

Re: [Mailman-Developers] incorrect generated HTML

On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 11:57 -0500, Joshua Ginsberg wrote: > I vote for Zope Page Templates. > http://www.owlfish.com/software/simpleTAL/ I actually spent a lot of time when prototyping MM3 and used TAL (the one from Zope3) and found it excruciating to use, especially when i18n was added. It's bee

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Virtual Domains Redux (w proposal)

On Sat, 2006-03-04 at 14:57 -0500, Bob Puff wrote: > > I.e, for the initial cut, split the lists/ structure into > > lists// and similarly for archives/private and > > archives/public. > > Definite +1 on that! Yep, that's definitely where my thinking was leading the last time I worked on this.

Re: [Mailman-Developers] canonical MM-List-Name

On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 12:44 -0800, Andrew D. Clark wrote: > I've made a small patch to HTMLFormatter.py to provide for a canonical (aka > lowercase) list name. This is handy for a variety of reasons. > > 383a384 > > '' : self.real_name.lower(), > > I don't really care if it is calle

[Mailman-Developers] Moving to Subversion after 2.1.8 is released

SourceForge has recently made Subversion available to projects, and I am planning on switching us from CVS to Subversion after the 2.1.8 release goes out. If you don't access the bleeding edge Mailman code in the source repository, you probably don't care, and can ignore the rest of this message.

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] mailman NEWS,2.64,2.65

On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 10:15 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Update of /cvsroot/mailman/mailman > In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv30399 > > Modified Files: > NEWS > Log Message: > Added a new list attribute 'subscribe_auto_approval' which is a list of email > address

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] mailman NEWS,2.64,2.65

On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 10:27 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Yes, I absolutely agree. That's why this patch/feature was only applied > to the trunk and not to the Release_2_1-maint branch. > > If you're saying should we hold off completely on putting new features > in CVS and wait for svn, I can do th

[Mailman-Developers] New Mailman wiki, Subversion (and other stuff)

For a while now, I've been trying to implement several project management improvements for Mailman, so that future development can be opened up to more people. As Tokio's and Mark's work has shown, there are very talented programmers out there that can contribute great stuff to Mailman if given a

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Unified Moderator Interface

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 22:17 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > "Kevin" == Kevin Kubasik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Kevin> Or a way for one moderator to view all pending messages by > Kevin> logging in once. Since it is not uncommon that one spammer > Kevin> crawls the site

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] SF.net SVN: mailman: [7862] trunk/mailman/Mailman/Cgi

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 19:24 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Fix a couple of typos/oversights in Barry's type and logging changes. > > Modified Paths: > -- > trunk/mailman/Mailman/Cgi/admin.py > trunk/mailman/Mailman/Cgi/admindb.py > Modified: trunk/mailman/Mailman/Cgi/admin.p

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] SF.net SVN: mailman: [7858] trunk/mailman

On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 08:30 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > I had some hours playing with the new svn trunk. (I was a little bit > busy because our academic year begins April.) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Revision: 7858 > > Author: bwarsaw > > Date: 2006-04-16 21:08:17 -0700 (Sun, 16 A

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] SF.net SVN: mailman: [7858] trunk/mailman

On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 15:19 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote: > Well, it should be a mess. :-( I'm hoping we can make it less so! > Consider mailman get a spam from a foreign country and caused an error. > Mailman may complain UnicodeDecodeError and spew an excerpt containing > unknown charset str

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] SF.net SVN: mailman: [7858] trunk/mailman

On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 17:12 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > "Tokio" == Tokio Kikuchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tokio> Consider mailman get a spam from a foreign country and > Tokio> caused an error. Mailman may complain UnicodeDecodeError > Tokio> and spew an excerpt co

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Logging issues on the trunk

On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:46 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > There are a few remaining issues regarding logging in the svn trunk. > > 1) The ReopenableFileHandler.__init__ method in Mailman/loginit.py >calls > > logging.FileHandler.__init__(self, filename, mode, encoding) > >This met

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Logging issues on the trunk

On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 19:20 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Barry Warsaw wrote: > >Looks like that's a Python 2.3/2.4 compatibility issue. Dang. Okay, > >I'll figure out a workaround for that. > > > It doesn't seem to me to be 2.3/2.4 compatibility. It

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-i18n] Problems with Vietnamese translation

On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 08:16 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > >Your next mail: > > > >> There is no entry for Vietnamese in the add_languages() statements in > >> Defaults.py.in in the Release_2_1-maint branch or in the LANGUAGE_DICT > >> entries in Defaults.py.in in the trunk. > > > >Who should add suc

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Logging issues on the trunk

On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 14:46 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > There are a few remaining issues regarding logging in the svn trunk. Thanks. I think all these issues should be resolved now, however the scripts/* scripts have only been minimally tested. -Barry signature.asc Description: This is a digi

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 22:46 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote: > If the previous value of the "Sender:" field is being lost, then > that should be corrected. At the very least, the value should be > saved in an "Old-Sender:" or "Previous-Sender:" or some other > suitable renamed sender field. P

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-checkins] SF.net SVN: mailman: [7858] trunk/mailman

On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 23:23 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > >>>>> "BAW" == Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > BAW> We may have to make modifications to the email package > BAW> though, but I'm not sure. It should proba

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 10:29 -0700, John W. Baxter wrote: > On 4/28/06 6:06 AM, "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 22:46 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote: > > > >> If the previous value of the "Sender:" field is be

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Problem with new bin/Makefile and Cygwin

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 11:06 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > The recent 'mmshell' change to bin/Makefile.in causes a problem in > Cygwin (I really have to make a 'real' test platform one of these > days, but that's another story). Fixed in r7881. -Barry signature.asc Description: This is a digitall

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

Now that I have a few minutes to breath ;) I'll try to summarize my thoughts on this, and then perhaps go back later and follow up to specific points later in the thread. I'm sympathetic to ripping out the Sender: field munging. It was always primarily a workaround for buggy MTAs. If the majorit

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 13:05 -0500, Neal Groothuis wrote: > As I noted in my previous response, I believe that the correct field (if > Mailman were to add a "Sender:" header) to add would be "Resent-Sender". > Please see RFC 2822, section 3.6.6. Whatever else we decide, I don't agree, or at le

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:08 -0400, Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ...Trouble similar to a current problem I am having with AOL: they are > bouncing all email with the > FROM: address of a specific AOL user, when mailman delivers the > messages to -any- aol or cs.com > address. Have you tried tu

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Sender field

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 17:32 -0400, James Ralston wrote: > I would argue that the best course of action is to excise Sender > header rewriting entirely and provide no option to turn it on. > (Mailman has way too many options already.) I agree that this is what we should hope for. Our data support

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:13 -0600, Hans G. Ehrbar wrote: > This brings to mind another example > of an unfortunate choice of words: on some of my mailing > lists people got outright paranoid because they received a > message that their submission was not accepted because of > "suspicious headers".

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Log messages run together

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 19:46 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > As of revision 7877 to Mailman/loginit.py, log file messages lack a > terminating newline. Adding one to FMT as in > > FMT = '%(asctime)s (%(process)d) %(message)s\n' > > fixes the problem. Fixed (slightly differently) in r7882. -Barry

Re: [Mailman-Developers] GNU FSF Assignment

On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 00:22 +0200, Fil wrote: > can someone point me to the procedure/documents needed to assign copyright > to Barry^H^H^H^H^H the FSF ? I can't find them on Google or on the GNU > project pages (??). Well, if you assigning your changes to me, it would be simple ('cause I wouldn

Re: [Mailman-Developers] New Mailman logging

On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 18:04 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > I don't mean to imply that such a function is necessarily required. > Most problems (except maybe for messages from the Python library) can > easily be handled by changing the sys.stderr writes to logging calls. +1 I'll make these changes t

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 19:12 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote: > I think we need to gather a lot more information about the likely > outcome from this change, and I think the best way to achieve this is > through giving admins (either site admins or list admins) the ability > to set an option and

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 00:00 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Sender doesn't instruct *conformant* MTAs at all, does it? AFAIK the > only thing that a RFC 2821-conforming MTA looks at is the Return-Path > header, and it's supposed to remove that. > > So this is purely a matter of pragmatic sel

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Sender field

On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 09:03 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > This can be done by making a modified SMTPDirect.py and modifying the > pipeline for the XEmacs lists. I'm pretty sure you know how to do > this, but after I was recently reminded (by you I think - thank you) > that this is a good way to do l

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Sender field

On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 02:56 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > I once added a maybe-log-and-return handler at every point in the > pipeline on our busiest list. No effect on load. I dunno, if you're > handling a million posts a day you might notice that. But handler > calling is way down in th

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Sender field

On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 17:09 -0400, James Ralston wrote: > We're going to implement it, because we really don't have any choice. > :/ ...and later... > Since disabling the Sender header processing is literally a one-line > patch, we're going to go ahead and do it. If it breaks horribly (even > f

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 18:16 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Neal Groothuis wrote: > > > >Mailman is not the originator of the message, so it should > >not be tampering with the From: or Sender: fields at all. > > > This is arguably not true. Mailman may add a list header and/or list > footer to the

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] Sender field

On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 13:27 -0500, Neal Groothuis wrote: > > I'd like to work up an unofficial diff to Mailman 2.1 for people like > > Stephen who are willing to give it a try on a live site. > > I'm not sure this is even necessary. > > Ezmlm doesn't touch the Sender: header at all, Majordomo s

Re: [Mailman-Developers] why not PageTemplates for GUI?

On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 09:49 +0200, Dario Lopez-Kästen wrote: > I am wondering why any future template suggestion a priori rule out > PageTemplates? I find them really handy to use, at least in zope-contexts. > > Is it becuase it is zope or other reasons? I actually tried to implement a u/i usin

Re: [Mailman-Developers] why not PageTemplates for GUI?

On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 08:27 +0200, Dario Lopez-Kästen wrote: > ;-) I have an itch I need to scratch here, it's about integration etc, > so perhaps I'll be able to produce something. Not anytime soon, though, > but for my personal needs, Pagetemeplates would be the cleanest solution. A little te

Re: [Mailman-Developers] GNU FSF Assignment

For future reference, I've put a copy of the request form in our wiki: http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/GNU+copyright+assignment+request+form Cheers, -Barry signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Mailman-Developers mai

Re: [Mailman-Developers] sender-based authorisation

On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 15:21 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > We definitely want to move towards a single 'user identity/account' per > person per site with a single authorization and multiple email > addresses and subscriptions. Quoting from the todo list > Yes, this is

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Why does Mailman delete post recipients fromCc: header?

On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 09:12 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Mark Sapiro wrote: > > > >I understand why it is removed from the recipient list - that's the > >whole point - but does anyone know/remember why it is also removed > >from the Cc: header? This seems unnecessary and inconsistent since it > >isn

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Topic regexps

On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 08:00 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: > The regexp entry is compiled in re.VERBOSE mode. This can be good, but > also causes problems as the 'help' doesn't mention this. Further, the > description says 'Topic keywords, one per line, to match against each > message.' The implication

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Hooks for external archivers

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 12:01:11 +0100 Gareth McCaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Suppose you're using Mailman with a separate archiving system > such as Lurker or mod_mbox or something. Then there are a few > points at which the external archiver needs

Re: [Mailman-Developers] 2.1.8 documentation mismatch

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 17:23:08 +0100 (BST) David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whilst guiding a potential list-owner through the approval/moderation > procedure, I spotted an inconsistency. A typical > "http://.../admindb/..."; page ("Administrative

Re: [Mailman-Developers] 2.1.8 documentation mismatch

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 22:02:44 -0700 Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I agree, but which is the best term to use? Reading the dictionary > >entries for "approve" and "accept", I think I like the former: > > Actually, both terms are used on the

Re: [Mailman-Developers] 2.1.8 documentation mismatch

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 10:41:26 +0100 Ian Eiloart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Even better would be to integrate Mailman into MTA's better, so that > the MTA can use Mailman data to reject spam. I think that will be problematic, given the wide variety o

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >