On Sep 11, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
There should be an option(s?) for the membership list to be entirely
list-admin controlled, (the Hotel California option[1][2]), in which
case the irrelevant headers should be suppressed.
Definitely. Although I don't have tests for it
Mark Sapiro wrote:
If I understand correctly the requirement 'ordained', Mailman is
already doing exactly that. The only way to keep the HTML part
'intact' while adding the footer is to add the footer as a separate
MIME part which is what Mailman does.
If this then results in a message which
Oh I know WHY it was done. However, being a [CENSORED] I would have
said Get a real client or report the bug to the mothership and hope
[HAHAHA CACKLE CACKLE SNORT] they get around to fixing it.
You can't give those bastards an inch.
--
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 11, 2009, at 15:48, Barry
Christopher C. Wright wrote:
Mark Sapiro wrote:
See the FAQ at http://wiki.list.org/x/84A9. It is clear that options
3 and 4 don't work for you. If neither option 1 or 2 works either, you
can see the note at the bottom which will lead you to a patch which we
don't recommend for the reasons
I am fighting a variation of this right now. We have several
automated lists from which members can not remove themselves. Due to
complaints about subscription headers that would not work, I removed
them. The only way I found to do that was by turning off
include_rfc2369_headers.
On Sep 11, 2009, at 10:44, Kirke Johnson kjohn...@pcc.edu wrote:
Due to complaints about subscription headers that would not work, I
removed them. The only way I found to do that was by turning off
include_rfc2369_headers.
I would think the proper solution is to fix them, not remove them.
The headers would work, but the subscription would automatically be
restored the next night. Folks find that frustrating and would rather
not be reminded about it. There will always be a percentage who do
not want to receive information that is considered critical to the
organization providing
LuKreme writes:
On Sep 11, 2009, at 10:44, Kirke Johnson kjohn...@pcc.edu wrote:
Due to complaints about subscription headers that would not work, I
removed them. The only way I found to do that was by turning off
include_rfc2369_headers.
I would think the proper solution is
Kirke Johnson wrote:
I am fighting a variation of this right now. We have several
automated lists from which members can not remove themselves. Due to
complaints about subscription headers that would not work, I removed
them. The only way I found to do that was by turning off
On 11-Sep-2009, at 11:41, Mark Sapiro wrote:
Yes, that's the way it works, but maybe it shouldn't. What do people
think about changing this?
Well, I'd be in favor of forcing the rfc2369 headers to always be
there, myself. I hate it when lists don't have them.
I think the solution to the
On Sep 11, 2009, at 3:16 PM, LuKreme wrote:
On 11-Sep-2009, at 11:41, Mark Sapiro wrote:
Yes, that's the way it works, but maybe it shouldn't. What do people
think about changing this?
Well, I'd be in favor of forcing the rfc2369 headers to always be
there, myself. I hate it when lists
On Sep 11, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Kirke Johnson wrote:
I am fighting a variation of this right now. We have several
automated lists from which members can not remove themselves. Due to
complaints about subscription headers that would not work, I removed
them. The only way I found to do that
Barry Warsaw writes:
On Sep 11, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Kirke Johnson wrote:
The only way I found to do that was by turning off
include_rfc2369_headers.
Maybe we just need a new option to control the List-Subscribe and List-
Unsubscribe headers? I think that if
13 matches
Mail list logo
