Mark Sapiro writes:
> But, the fact remains that there are many commonly used MUAs that drop a
> whitespace character in unfolding and there's not much we can do about that.
I wonder if they're better with RFC 2047. That is, suppose we
rendered
Subject: Pretend this is a long field
as
Subje
Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>
>So let me modify these as follows and see if this is any better:
>
>> (1) LHS (left-hand-side) rules
>
>Present to list-owner for disposition as done today, but mark it
>prominently as "noreply address, almost certainly a forgery".
>
>> (2) sender rules
>
>Present to list-ow
On 6/29/07 11:23 AM, "Rich Kulawiec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> p.s. As as aside, I strongly recommend against callbacks/SAV. It's
> inherently abusive, it's a deliberate attempt to bypass site security
> policies [and thus illegal in some jurisdictions, but ask your attorney
> for clarificatio
Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
>If I understand what you want, you can accomplish it by finding the code
>
># Calculate the non-VERP envelope sender.
>envsender = msgdata.get('envsender')
>if envsender is None:
>if mlist:
>envsender = mlist.GetBouncesEmail()
>else:
>
D G Teed wrote:
>
>I think my answer is to edit SMTPDirect.py to set the
>Sender and Return Path, but I'm not sure what variable
>I need to use there. Is 'mlist.owner[:]' what I'll need?
>I'd want the specific list owner, not the site mailman owner.
What you need is mlist.GetOwnerEmail() which w
We are doing well in our migration from MJ2 to mailman.
The default of sending emails with the -bounce address doesn't fit
with our needs. We'd like it to work the way it did with MJ2, where
the listname-owner type of address was in the Return-Path.
Typically we set our list owner to be some admi
Mark, John -- reading both your messages (and applying significantly more
coffee) has induced enlightenment. Yep, this is just not going to work
the way I'd suggested. Bad me. No biscuit.
So let me modify these as follows and see if this is any better:
> (1) LHS (left-hand-side) rules
Present
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Finkel wrote:
>
> I am sorry that I was not clear in my posting. In a "normal" list,
> where persons subscribe and unsubscribe, I am content with the Mailman
> bounce processing, where Mailman will set "nomail" for addresses that
> continually
On 6/29/07 7:44 AM, "Rich Kulawiec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Two related suggestions.
>
>
> (1) LHS (left-hand-side) rules
>
> Any incoming mail message whose putative sender matches:
>
> do-not-reply@
> do.not.reply@
> donotreply@
> no-reply@
> no.reply@
> noreply@
>
> and which is direc
Barry Finkel wrote:
>> I have a question/problem with Mailman bounce processing.
>> We have Mailman lists here that are re-built every morning from our
>> Human Resources database. When mail is sent to one of these lists, and
>> one or more of the e-mail addresses therein have problems, I see in m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Finkel wrote:
>
> Below are pieces of two messages. I have the original message
> from the archives of the sender followed by the relevant lines of
> the list .mbox file (including line numbers).
>
> ===
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> Two related suggestions.
> [1] The difference between a reject and a bounce: a reject is performed
> by emitting the appropriate SMTP status code and closing the connection;
> that is, the message is refused while the SMTP con
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Finkel wrote:
> I have a question/problem with Mailman bounce processing.
> We have Mailman lists here that are re-built every morning from our
> Human Resources database. When mail is sent to one of these lists, and
> one or more of the e-mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jesús Oliván wrote:
> I've applied changes in my regexp like u said, thanks!
>
> and this is the From line you requested:
>
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?123456789-123456789-12345678=E99-123456789-123456789?=
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?-123456789-123456789-?= <[EMAI
I have a question/problem with Mailman bounce processing.
We have Mailman lists here that are re-built every morning from our
Human Resources database. When mail is sent to one of these lists, and
one or more of the e-mail addresses therein have problems, I see in my
morning report (and/or in the
Two related suggestions.
(1) LHS (left-hand-side) rules
Any incoming mail message whose putative sender matches:
do-not-reply@
do.not.reply@
donotreply@
no-reply@
no.reply@
noreply@
and which is directed to any of the Mailman standard aliases can
Barry Finkel writes:
>> I am running Mailman 2.1.9. I have a list where one posting has a
>> "Subject:" line:
>>
>> Change in Procedure for Computers on list with possible Antivirus
>> Problems
>>
>> The next posting in the thread has:
>>
>> Change in Procedure for Compute
I've applied changes in my regexp like u said, thanks!
and this is the From line you requested:
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?123456789-123456789-12345678=E99-123456789-123456789?=
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?-123456789-123456789-?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This one comes from a mail that has not beed accepted by mailman
18 matches
Mail list logo
