William Bagwell writes:
> So if a list adds a footer to the body of a message (many do) then that
> implies that the Message-ID /should/ be changed.
No. As the section you quoted later shows, that is a "syntactic
difference" and clearly *not* a reason for changing the Message-ID.
> Obviousl
On Thursday 11 April 2013, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> No, by definition it's a nasty feature, as it involves nonconformance
> to RFC 5322.
How so? I see two places in section 3.6.4. that suggest otherwise.
" A message
identifier pertains to exactly one version of a particular message;
subs
William Bagwell writes:
> As long as it defaults off and is user selectable I think this would be a
> nice feature.
No, by definition it's a nasty feature, as it involves nonconformance
to RFC 5322.
> Suggested similar in the past... It will break threading for those
> of us who want full U
On Thursday 11 April 2013, Joseph Brennan wrote:
> The solution, or workaround I would say, is to change the Message-ID.
> Possibly, a milter could do this on the way in on the Mailman host. Maybe
> add a fixed string to what's already there.
>
> However this might have some impact on non Gmail use
I think he is saying that his mailing list subscribers subscribed to
gmail do not receive a copy of they own mail.
fir this we do not have any solution :-)
The solution, or workaround I would say, is to change the Message-ID.
Possibly, a milter could do this on the way in on the Mailman hos
Le 11/04/2013 17:14, Mark Sapiro a écrit :
Neil Anuskiewicz wrote:
I do have a second gmail just for checking my own posts! The thing is this
is an informal list that I setup as a favor for a small organization. A
number of the list members have gmail so I'm not concerned about this for
me but
Neil Anuskiewicz wrote:
>I do have a second gmail just for checking my own posts! The thing is this
>is an informal list that I setup as a favor for a small organization. A
>number of the list members have gmail so I'm not concerned about this for
>me but for the subscribers. I'm the list admin so
Neil Anuskiewicz writes:
> You guys are saying that I could contact Google and actually have some
> influence? Have a lot of other people brought up the issue with
> them?
No, that was ironic. A lot of people (including several on this list)
have contacted them and asked them to make it possi
I do have a second gmail just for checking my own posts! The thing is this
is an informal list that I setup as a favor for a small organization. A
number of the list members have gmail so I'm not concerned about this for
me but for the subscribers. I'm the list admin so I want to make the
experienc
Hi,
On 4/10/2013 9:15 AM, Neil Anuskiewicz wrote:
I just setup a small mailman list (hosted by Bluehost) for a small
organization. I've set "Receive your own posts to the list?" to yes but i'm
still not receiving my own posts.
I'm wondering how might go about resolving this issue?
Resolve it
Le 11/04/2013 08:23, Mark Sapiro a écrit :
You could try adding your voice to those who've already communicated
with Google about this, but I suspect they think they're doing the
right thing and aren't listening.
it's probably possible to open a second gmail account (I know it's
sometime anno
Neil Anuskiewicz wrote:
>
>I just setup a small mailman list (hosted by Bluehost) for a small
>organization. I've set "Receive your own posts to the list?" to yes but i'm
>still not receiving my own posts.
>
>I'm wondering how might go about resolving this issue?
You could try adding your voice t
Hi,
I just setup a small mailman list (hosted by Bluehost) for a small
organization. I've set "Receive your own posts to the list?" to yes but i'm
still not receiving my own posts.
I'm wondering how might go about resolving this issue?
Thanks.
Neil*
*
---
13 matches
Mail list logo
