Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[ This was getting pretty long and a bit repetitive, so I trimmed it brutally.  It's still pretty long, sigh. ] On 2/6/2018 2:09 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > But:  in my work contexts, it is quite common for a discussion to span > > two teams.  Again, a "reply" that goes to the List-Post

Re: [Mailman-Users] Stuck OutgoingRunner

--On 6. Februar 2018 um 08:01:18 -0800 Mark Sapiro wrote: On 02/06/2018 03:51 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: --On 4. Februar 2018 um 12:54:43 +0900 Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote: As far as I read the code, if OutgoingRunner catch SIGINT during waiting for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Message-ID required

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 02/05/2018 12:22 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > > According to RFC, Message-ID is an originator field, and MUST be > > present and MUST be unique. > > Do you have a reference for this? I thought this was correct, but I > recently looked it up in RFC 5322 and

Re: [Mailman-Users] Message-ID required - was: Reply-to options not working

Dimitri Maziuk writes: > Heh. I personally believe that a message sent by a mailing list > *must* have the mailing list as the originator: dkim, id, and > whatever else. First, please be careful with terminology. *Originator* is well-defined (RFC 5598) as the agent of the Author that first

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

Jordan Brown writes: > On 2/5/2018 12:29 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > [various stuff, citation line preserved to make a point below] > You don't mention what your "smart reply" does with To and CC > addresses.  Discards them, I assume? Yes. It's intended to do what a certain large group

Re: [Mailman-Users] Stuck OutgoingRunner

--On 3. Februar 2018 um 19:13:33 -0800 Mark Sapiro wrote: On 02/03/2018 01:03 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: Did you look at the out queue, and if so was there a .bak file there. This would be the entry currently being processed. I looked at the out queue, and there was no

Re: [Mailman-Users] Stuck OutgoingRunner

--On 4. Februar 2018 um 12:54:43 +0900 Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote: On 02/04/18 12:13, Mark Sapiro wrote: The status of 'S' for OutgoingRunner is "uninterruptable sleep". This means it's either called time.sleep for QRUNNER_SLEEP_TIME (default = 1 second) which is

Re: [Mailman-Users] Stuck OutgoingRunner

On 02/06/2018 03:51 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: > > --On 4. Februar 2018 um 12:54:43 +0900 Yasuhito FUTATSUKI > wrote: >> >> As far as I read the code, if OutgoingRunner catch SIGINT during waiting >> for response from the MTA, the signal handler for SIGINT in qrunner set

Re: [Mailman-Users] Message-ID required - was: Reply-to options not working

On 2018-02-06 04:09, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: Do you have something to add to that, or disagree with that? I said it was what *I* believe, not what IETF believes. Dima -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Stuck OutgoingRunner

On 02/06/2018 03:48 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: > > Is it possible that the OutgoingRunner was done with transmitting the > message and had already removed the queue file, but that the connection > hadn't yet been closed? Only if something went very wrong in SMTPDirect.process() which would

Re: [Mailman-Users] Stuck OutgoingRunner

On 02/07/18 01:01, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 02/06/2018 03:51 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: --On 4. Februar 2018 um 12:54:43 +0900 Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote: As far as I read the code, if OutgoingRunner catch SIGINT during waiting for response from the MTA, the signal