This is VERY interesting. I really appreciate this suggestion and may try it after confirming that disables occur at 9:00AM local time. Thanks for your insights!
Another thought I had would be to setup a list-owner web page for each emailing list that would run a grep script on the Mailman "Bounces Log" that would (1) show recent (last hour) bounce activity for (2) that specific list following a Mass Subscribe/Invite operation. I don't have access to the Mailman server itself, but if such a web page could give me a window into the Bounces Log for my specific list, that would be all I need. I just need to identify which addresses are bouncing. *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 12/28/2010 at 2:54 PM Mark Sapiro wrote: >Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> >>Superticker2 (Mark) writes: >> >> > I appreciate your suggestion to set bounce_processing=1, >> > bounce_score_threshold=0, but wouldn't this would cause "existing >> > addresses" with scores at "2" to be removed immediately, which we don't >> > want to do. We want the existing addresses to remain until their >bounce >> > score reaches 2.5. >> >>I don't think it causes them to be removed immediately, but it would >>cause those with scores at 1.5 to get removed on the next bounce, so >>it's probably out for you. > > >Stephen is correct. Those with non-stale scores >= 1 will not be >removed immediately, but they will be removed the next time >cron/disabled runs (default 09:00 daily) if the threshold is not >raised before that. > >It seems pretty safe to do this. Sometime after cron/disabled runs >reduce the threshold to <= 1, make sure that >bounce_notify_owner_on_disable is Yes and do the mass subscribe. Since >no list members are mailed in this process, they won't bounce. After >allowing time for bounces to be returned and processed (bounces are >queued in Mailman and only processed at 15 minute intervals), raise >the threshold to the original value. > >Note however that this will only work for mass subscribes. For >invitations, the returned bounces will be for addresses which aren't >list members and these are always ignored. > > >>Note that the final decision is Marks (v2.x) or Barry's (v3)q, of >>course. But I tend to think they'll agree with me. > > >FWIW, I do agree. > >-- >Mark Sapiro <m...@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, >San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
