Philipp wrote:
>> %-16(putstrf{List-Id})
>>
>> to my scan arguments, and it's close, but not yet what I want.
>> Ideally, I just want what's in <> of the List-Id:, and I'd be happy with
the
>> first 16 characters only. But I can't see a way to get that. So I'd
settle
>You could just use:
>
>%(addr{list-id})
Very clever!
--Ken
--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
[2019-09-29 18:16] Michael Richardson
> So I've added:
>
>%-16(putstrf{List-Id})
>
> to my scan arguments, and it's close, but not yet what I want.
> Ideally, I just want what's in <> of the List-Id:, and I'd be happy with the
> first 16 characters only. But I can't see a way to get that.
Ken Hornstein wrote:
>> to my scan arguments, and it's close, but not yet what I want.
>> Ideally, I just want what's in <> of the List-Id:, and I'd be happy with
the
>> first 16 characters only. But I can't see a way to get that. So I'd
settle
>> for the last 16 bytes of the
>to my scan arguments, and it's close, but not yet what I want.
>Ideally, I just want what's in <> of the List-Id:, and I'd be happy with the
>first 16 characters only. But I can't see a way to get that. So I'd settle
>for the last 16 bytes of the entire header, but I can't get that either.
Michael Richardson wrote:
>> Sigh. I KNEW you were going to say that, but ... certainly you SOMEHOW
>> managed to live without this feature UP UNTIL NOW. I have given you a
>> solution that works for the upcoming changes to THIS mailing list. You
>> can expand on it as you
Date:Fri, 27 Sep 2019 13:35:25 -0400
From:Ken Hornstein
Message-ID: <20190927173529.e363896...@pb-smtp20.pobox.com>
| I am assuming that we are fine with
| the "don't modify the message" setting for this mailing list
It is certainly fine with me, I have never
Ken Hornstein wrote:
>> yes, but that's too specific. I'd like it generically for all lists :-)
> Sigh. I KNEW you were going to say that, but ... certainly you SOMEHOW
> managed to live without this feature UP UNTIL NOW. I have given you a
> solution that works for the
>yes, but that's too specific. I'd like it generically for all lists :-)
Sigh. I KNEW you were going to say that, but ... certainly you SOMEHOW
managed to live without this feature UP UNTIL NOW. I have given you a
solution that works for the upcoming changes to THIS mailing list. You
can
Ken Hornstein wrote:
> The key is this line:
> %<{list-id}%<(match nmh-workers)[nmh-workers] %>%>\
> What that means is:
> If the list-id header is set, AND it contains the string nmh-workers,
> then output the string "[nmh-workers] ". You might find that
>
>> I won't mind if the Subject stops being mangled (I use the
>> list-post header for filtering). I also won't mind if the body
>> stops being mangled
>
>I do, so let me ask:
>
>can I get List-Id easily inserted into scan output in a way that will
>make mh-e happy?
Given the current
>But that makes me wonder a bit: how much does that cost?
Everyone. Can we NOT TALK ON THE GODDAMN NMH MAILING LIST about HOW MUCH YOU
HAVE TO PAY TO RUN YOUR OWN MAIL SERVER to WORK AROUND DMARC FILTERING.
Please?
--Ken
--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
>these e-mail filtering techniques ought to be applied to the envelope
>and to the Sender: header, not to From:. nothing we can do about that?
Sigh. I hate to wade into this, but ... I understand where people are
coming from. Current MUAs don't display the Sender: by default (and I
suspect
hymie! wrote in <20190927142152.ga21...@alfred.local.net>:
|On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 02:54:14AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
|> Ken Hornstein wrote on 2019-09-26 09:36:
|>> I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
|>> summary is: in the near future subject lines to
Paul Vixie wrote in <2b52ccf2-a559-9b70-869c-68da37fee...@redbarn.org>:
|Ken Hornstein wrote on 2019-09-26 09:36:
|> Everyone,
|>
|> I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
|> summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
|> longer be
Ken Hornstein wrote in <20190926231658.6947788...@pb-smtp20.pobox.com>:
|>And it is entirely unrelated to this thread of course.
|
|I mean, at least we're in agreement there :-/ And I'm not even sure
|WHY you care about what version of TLS that eggs.gnu.org supports, since
|it is handling
hymie! wrote on 2019-09-27 07:21:> Unfortunately, Yahoo isn't the only
culrpit. More and more servers are
honoring DMARC.
yes, i know.
I, for example, keep my email on my own server at home,
but because my ISP blocks port 25, I have to hire a third party to
receive and re-send my email
Ken Hornstein wrote:
> I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
> summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
> longer be prefixed with "[nmh-workers]" and there won't be a footer
> at the end of the message anyone saying that
Andy Bradford wrote:
> I won't mind if the Subject stops being mangled (I use the list-post
> header for filtering). I also won't mind if the body stops being
> mangled
I do, so let me ask:
can I get List-Id easily inserted into scan output in a way that will make
mh-e happy?
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 02:54:14AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
> Ken Hornstein wrote on 2019-09-26 09:36:
> > Everyone,
> >
> > I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
> > summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
> > longer be prefixed with
Ken Hornstein wrote on 2019-09-26 09:36:
Everyone,
I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
longer be prefixed with "[nmh-workers]" and there won't be a footer
at the end of the message anyone
Hi Ken,
> the other option is to do what is called "Munge From"
That's one other option.
Note, nmh-workers has been configured with
dmarc_moderation_action="Munge From" for ages and no one here has
grumbled. It typically only munges Froms from Yahoo! I expect the
other two nmh lists match
Thus said Ken Hornstein on Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:36:41 -0400:
> You can read the details in the message for the complete technical
> reasons why this is happening; the other option is to do what is
> called "Munge From" and I personally think this is 100x worse (I am on
> a Yahoo mailing
On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:36:41 -0400, Ken Hornstein said:
> I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
> summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
> longer be prefixed with "[nmh-workers]" and there won't be a footer
> at the end of the message
>And it is entirely unrelated to this thread of course.
I mean, at least we're in agreement there :-/ And I'm not even sure
WHY you care about what version of TLS that eggs.gnu.org supports, since
it is handling messages for public mailing lists.
>I personally feel sad because of the direction
Ken Hornstein wrote in <20190926174635.3b44384...@pb-smtp20.pobox.com>:
|>Yuck. As a purely rhetorical note, do they have a plan to upgrade
|>from the TLS 1.0 they use. (And i hope this does not qualify as
|>sexual harassment. It is not! I eat at home, like the Beatles.)
|
|I ... do not
>Yuck. As a purely rhetorical note, do they have a plan to upgrade
>from the TLS 1.0 they use. (And i hope this does not qualify as
>sexual harassment. It is not! I eat at home, like the Beatles.)
I ... do not know about the TLS 1.0 issues, nor do I see how it's relevant
to this discussion.
Ken Hornstein wrote in <20190926163645.c801a82...@pb-smtp20.pobox.com>:
|Everyone,
|
|I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
|summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
|longer be prefixed with "[nmh-workers]" and there won't be a footer
Everyone,
I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
longer be prefixed with "[nmh-workers]" and there won't be a footer
at the end of the message anyone saying that this is the nmh-workers
mailing list.
29 matches
Mail list logo
