On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 04:31:41PM -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> That sounds good, but evidently, judging from the number of
> Debian/Ubuntu packge users who come to this list with mail delivery
> issues because they have ended up with some Postfix configuration that
> combines Mailman aliases and po
Jérôme writes:
> Anyway, collaborating with the packagers to improve packages and avoid
> troubles in the first place is of course the best, yet time-costly.
Ah, but Mark's time is the (second-most? :-)[1] valuable resource we
have. That's why I've more or less volunteered.
Footnotes:
[1]
Le 2012-05-16 09:27, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
Maybe improve documents
(including our own -- our web pages should detect Debian/Ubuntu and
Red Hat/Fedora hosted browsers and display big "You probably don't
want to read this, read your distro's docs instead" warnings!)
Regarding this specif
Mark Sapiro writes:
>
> That sounds good,
Be fair, Mark. :-) When the distro package works, it *is* good. And
it works most of the time AFAIK.
> but evidently, judging from the number of Debian/Ubuntu packge
> users who come to this list with mail delivery issues because they
> have ende
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Geoff Shang wrote:
> >
> >I've done several Mailman installs under Debian and Ubuntu and have had
> >minimal problems. The key in my opinion is to look at the installation
> >guide and make sure you actually do everything that's listed there
Geoff Shang wrote:
>
>I've done several Mailman installs under Debian and Ubuntu and have had
>minimal problems. The key in my opinion is to look at the installation
>guide and make sure you actually do everything that's listed there that's
>appropriate. It's easy enough to assume that a lot o
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Geoff Shang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to make the case for considering the Debian etc Mailman instead
> of rolling your own.
>
> I've done several Mailman installs under Debian and Ubuntu and have had
> minimal problems.
I can't claim a lot of experience, but I
Hi,
I'd like to make the case for considering the Debian etc Mailman instead
of rolling your own.
I've done several Mailman installs under Debian and Ubuntu and have had
minimal problems. The key in my opinion is to look at the installation
guide and make sure you actually do everything tha
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 11:54 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> But when you do run into issues, whether a need for customization or a
> bug, it help a lot to be using something as close to upstream's
> recommended configuration as possible. That's why many projects (not
> just Mailman) recommend
Lindsay Haisley writes:
> It's probably just as easy to bypass the precompiled Ubuntu package and
> work straight from the Mailman distribution. If I have issues, which
> are ususally creative problems with Python, I'd much rather work with
> the Mailman devs than with Canonical :-)
We do li
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 21:26 -0400, David wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Lindsay Haisley
> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 12:30 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> > They don't eliminate the Mailman user. They just call it
> 'list' rather
> > than 'mailman'.
>
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 12:30 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> > They don't eliminate the Mailman user. They just call it 'list' rather
> > than 'mailman'.
>
> Actually, it's barely the same thing. It appears that qrunner gets run
> as user 'list
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
>
>Actually, it's barely the same thing. It appears that qrunner gets run
>as user 'list' out of the mailman init script, but all other Mailman
>components are owned by root, group list, albeit all the executables
>have group execute enabled.
So they're group 'list' and SE
On 5/11/2012 2:30 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
I just installed, and just as promptly un-installed mailman on Ubuntu
server 10.04.4 LTS. The offered pacakge version of mailman for this
release, which I used, is 2.1.13-1.
The Ubuntu packages are based on Debian.
I have a f
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:37:20PM -0700, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> - Probably the best way to get authoritative answers is to contact the Debian
>Mailman packaging team:
>
>pkg-mailman-hack...@lists.alioth.debian.org
>
>I don't know whether anyone from that team is on this list, or
>
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 12:30 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> They don't eliminate the Mailman user. They just call it 'list' rather
> than 'mailman'.
Actually, it's barely the same thing. It appears that qrunner gets run
as user 'list' out of the mailman init script, but all other Mailman
components a
On May 11, 2012, at 02:15 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
>I just installed, and just as promptly un-installed mailman on Ubuntu
>server 10.04.4 LTS. The offered pacakge version of mailman for this
>release, which I used, is 2.1.13-1.
>
>I have a few questions which perhaps someone could answer, if an
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
>I just installed, and just as promptly un-installed mailman on Ubuntu
>server 10.04.4 LTS. The offered pacakge version of mailman for this
>release, which I used, is 2.1.13-1.
The Ubuntu packages are based on Debian.
>I have a few questions which perhaps someone could
I just installed, and just as promptly un-installed mailman on Ubuntu
server 10.04.4 LTS. The offered pacakge version of mailman for this
release, which I used, is 2.1.13-1.
I have a few questions which perhaps someone could answer, if anyone
knows the thinking behind Canonical's (and the package
19 matches
Mail list logo
