Mark Sapiro wrote:
Giuliano Gavazzi wrote:
To: mylist-confirm+8a671672b88489848cd212b368d290cc343af848
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is the problem. You have VERP_CONFIRMATIONS = Yes so the
confirmation is From: and the user's reply should be To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
but the user's MUA
Barry Warsaw wrote:
I'm actually thinking we need /less/ magic in command line scripts,
especially for typical user and admin tasks, because I think
increasingly, fewer people have access to the command line (or know what
to do with it when they've got it).
Wearing my product manager's hat
R. Bernstein wrote:
Please allow me explain why I initially posted to mailman-developer.
Your reasons make perfect sense. I don't want you to think I was saying
your reasons were wrong when I mentioned in my prior post that I might
not have approved your initial post. Just that there is
R. Bernstein wrote:
I guess sometimes things are not what they may seem initally, so many
thanks for the detailed explanation; it all makes sense. It is also
interesting to learn that the GNU mailman mailing lists have the same
problems as other GNU lists. But it sounds like the GNU mailman
Brad Knowles wrote:
But there's a problem with multiple moderators, one that we have
on the mailman-users and mailman-developers lists ourselves -- in
addition to many other lists hosted on python.org. In short, the
problem is getting all the moderators to follow the same moderation
Brad Knowles wrote:
Unless you're talking about Python code you've developed to
implement this feature, or commenting on Python code that someone
else has developed to implement this feature, I'm pretty certain that
this discussion belongs on mailman-users and not here.
When
Nigel Metheringham wrote:
While agreeing that MM is not really a good spam control place, my life
would be made easier if:-
* Marking a message as spam killed all other messages sent by the
same sender address to that and all other lists currently
awaiting moderation.
John W. Baxter wrote:
Max == Max Bowsher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Max Is there any reason not to add web_page_url to the
Max configurable options in the admin GUI? Right below host_name
Max in the general category would be a good place.
Yes, there is a reason. It is the same
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Tokio == Tokio Kikuchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tokio - Is the terminology 'sibling' appropriate?
I hesistate to give it a +1 because I know I think differently from
most people, but FWIW I *did* guess what it does from that name.
Ditto.
jc
Because the mailman-users and mailman-developers lists frequently
discuss administrivia matters and because most users on these lists know
how to properly email the list server for administrivia tasks, most
administrivia filter matches to these lists are false positives.
We have just changed
Brad Knowles wrote:
At 4:35 PM -0400 2005-06-24, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what was the reason of the change? Does it
drastically decrease the server load or the something else?
I think it's primarily to reduce the workload of the volunteer
moderators.
There are
for the different characters only contain the get variable
letter and not findmember which is the variable posted by the search
form.
Have anyone else had the same problem? Would be nice with a fix for this.
JC Dill mentioned the same thing to me in private email.
Jimmy's bug report
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 13:30, Mark Sapiro wrote:
At least since 2.1.4
I think unfortunately, we're going to have to postpone fixing this until
after 2.1.6. We /really/ need to get this release out to fix the
security issues.
OK. Can we document the search
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 04:45, Fil wrote:
I would see it that way, in the Archiving section of admin :
Archiving on a foreign system :
---
prevent archiving on foreign systems yes [] no [x]
(adds a
Brad Knowles wrote:
At 7:17 PM +0900 2005-05-06, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Maybe you could make it part of the user's configuration. Then the
list master could default it to X-No-Archive: yes; individual users
could turn it to no if they want to, including on a message by message
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
The second is that this patch evidently constitutes a significant
endorsement of The Mail Archive. As I understand Jeff's post, he went
to the trouble of asking Lars if he would like a similar setup added
for Gmane, patch to be coded by Jeff || Jeff. I have to admit
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
JC == JC Dill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JC I personally don't see it as being a significant endorsement.
JC AIUI, it's a patch that allows 2 software programs to work
JC well together.
My understanding is that the programs already work well together
Tobias Eigen wrote:
- New third party archiving option that uses The Mail Archive. The
implementation subscribes or unsubscribes the
archive@mail-archive.com address from the subscriber list.
I find this whole discussion fascinating. I've been thinking about
these types of possibilities for
Adrian Bye wrote:
If someone wanted to pay large sums of money to make an
open source Yahoo! Groups-beating package, and pay people to
work on that as their full-time job, we might be able to
change this situation -- in time.
We've previously had conversations about some Yahoo groups
Hello,
We have set the mailman-developers list to require list admin approval
for membership requests because of a recent problem with some people
subscribing to this list and then posting messages that belong
elsewhere. Can you please share with us your background with mailman
and your purpose
Hello,
We have set the mailman-developers list to require list admin approval
for membership requests because of a recent problem with some people
subscribing to this list and then posting messages that belong
elsewhere. Can you please share with us your background with mailman
and your purpose
oops. Apologies for typo-ing the cc on these emails.
jc
___
Mailman-Developers mailing list
Mailman-Developers@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
Unsubscribe:
Florian Weimer wrote:
Last time I checked, Mailman lables its member-only archives
private, and the implicit promise to keep things posted to the list
private is not kept if the software assigns easily guessed to new
members.
I can only repeat that Mailman's current behavior surprises your users
23 matches
Mail list logo
