Moving to mailman-users, be a better place to post a request for
experience.
Please respect cross-posting restrictions. If you're just reporting
experience, reply-to is set to Mailman-Users which is appropriate (at
least, IIRC the Mailman Users/Developers lists don't mess with
preexisting Reply-T
[resend w/proper address]
On Jul 13, 2015, at 10:47 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>- Performance measurements. There are theoretical reasons to believe
> that under certain circumstances a "large" Mailman 3 under "heavy"
> use *might* suffer bottlenecks, but we just don't know yet.
Note that
On 03/05/2015 08:08 AM, Rakesh Verma wrote:
> i did the same but i am still getting the error, can i manually add the
> user to /etc/passwd???
Please keep threads on the list unless sending personal, private or
security information.
What happened when you did the useradd command?
There are two i
Reply-To set to Mailman-Users. Although actual work on an RFC
probably would be done by a developer, there's no reason to exclude
site admins and list owners, and the impact of DMARC is surely
apparent to developers, admins, and owners alike, as well as to our
subscribers.
Victoriano Giralt write
Barry Warsaw writes:
> Thus I am here to announce the imminent switch of our wiki to a new
> Moin server.
Hurray!
> Huge, huge thanks go to Paul Boddie for the incredible amount of
> work he's put into the conversion process.
Yes indeed! It's been a huge project, taking what, about a year
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> A critical incompatibility between the Mailman 2.1.18 final release and
> Python versions older than 2.6.5 or thereabouts affecting the DMARC Wrap
> Message action was discovered and fixed. This incompatibility also
> existed in the 2.1.16 and 2
* Mark Sapiro :
> On April 11, 2014 3:18:13 PM EDT, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> >On 04/11/2014 05:25 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> >>
> >> Tentatively rescheduled to 17:00 EDT (21:00 GMT) on Friday, 11 Apr in
> >room 525.
> >>
> >> I will attempt to post realtime summaries on #mailman.
> >
> >
> >Due to var
Guys, please take care to delete the mailman-users address if you're
using reply-to-all on this thread. Progress on MM3 is undoubtedly of
interest to MM-users, but the gory details of broken tests probably is
not
Reply-to-munging-still-considered-harmful-ly y'rs
P.S. Maybe I should revive th
On Feb 26, 2014, at 02:45 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > I have no idea what to do next,
This is clearly a bug, although I think it's relatively recent, so it might be
worth seeing if earlier revisions avoid the problem. Yes, I can reproduce it.
The interesting thing is that the test is in
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Nicolas Karageuzian
wrote:
> I encountered db lock using sqlite with mailman3 and tools.
> Switching to postgres avoid the db locking states.
> Maybe you should explore that way.
I'll try that.
> Hyperkitty moved to github so the lp ref is quite out of date for t
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:39 -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >I'm running Mailman 2.1.15 on a Ubuntu server, feeding into Courier MTA,
> >running Python 2.7.3. I track security updates and install them
> >promptly when they're issued by Ubuntu. Yesterday I updated the Linux
> >kernel from 3.2.0-58-ge
On Feb 20, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
>I'm running Mailman 2.1.15 on a Ubuntu server, feeding into Courier MTA,
>running Python 2.7.3. I track security updates and install them
>promptly when they're issued by Ubuntu. Yesterday I updated the Linux
>kernel from 3.2.0-58-generic (x8
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I am happy to announce the final release of Mailman 2.1.15. This
> release is identical to the 2.1.15rc1 release except for the version
> number and the inclusion of a missing part of the HTM
Mark Sapiro wrote:
>I am happy to announce the final release of Mailman 2.1.15. This release is
>identical to the 2.1.15rc1 release except for the version number and >the
>inclusion of a missing part of the HTML installation manual.
Thanks for this as ever, quality release. I upgraded in a ver
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I am happy to announce the first release candidate for Mailman 2.1.15.
>
> Python 2.4 is the minimum supported, but Python 2.6 is recommended.
> This release should work with Python 2.7, but
On Mar 26, 2012, at 04:11 PM, Andrea Crotti wrote:
>Great news Barry, but just one thing, I checked now on list.org and the GNU
>Mailman website and there is no mention of this release.. is that on purpose?
Not really. The server moved recently and my keys hadn't been installed.
Looks like they
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Hello Mailman enthusiasts!
> I'm also ecstatic to announce the first alpha release of Postorius, our new
> official name for the Django-based Mailman 3 web user interface. The name was
> suggested by core developer Florian Fuchs in honor of
On Mar 23, 2012, at 9:00 PM, "Barry Warsaw" wrote:
> Use the key, unlock the door
>See what your fate might have in store...
Everybody walk the dinosaur!
Seriously though, this is amazing news! Thanks to everyone who helped work on
this. I can't wait to give it a try!
Cheers,
Justin
-
On Sep 09, 2010, at 06:46 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>The patch is attached. Since it only affects the web CGIs, it can be
>applied and will be effective without restarting Mailman, although
>since it includes a patch to Utils.py which is imported by the
>qrunners, a restart of Mailman is advisable as
On Jun 13, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
Mailman is the wrong place to put an OpenID provider. That needs to
go somewhere else, and then you can put in code that allows Mailman
to be an OpenID Relyer.
Well put, and I could not agree more.
What would be very helpful would be adding
Malveeka Tewari writes:
> Our focus is on providing Single Sign On but we do not want to delegate
> authentication to a third party. Hence we want to implement OpenID provider
> for our Mailman service.
I don't think this is a good idea. Mailman is designed to deliver
single messages to multi
Hi Stephen
Thanks for your reply.
W want to implement the OpenID Provider for the mailman set up we are
running on our servers.
The idea is to use OpenID with mailman to provide single sign on for our
other user accounts like our wiki etc.
Our focus is on providing Single Sign On but we do not wan
Malveeka Tewari writes:
> 2. Sign in with existing openID login for your subscription
>
> *1. Enable/Disable openID login for your subscription* *account*
> For enabling and diabling the openID feature, the users login their
> subscribed accounts as they do now for changing any of the subcri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 9, 2009, at 5:47 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
I agree that the use of USE_ENVELOPE_SENDER as an anti-spoof is
outdated, particularly because it doesn't even come into play for
the
member/nonmember decision.
Strike three. :)
Our LMTP code
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 9, 2009, at 5:43 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
I'm not sure whether I do use it, but I think I should.
Most of our list users are in our own domain. That domain certainly
is less spoofable in the envelope, because we don't accept mail from
our
Kelly Jones wrote:
>It took me a long time to figure out that Mailman's 'virgin' directory
>was for messages that Mailman created itself. Is stuff like this
>documented somewhere? Is there a developer's guide to Mailman out
>there?
UTSL
There's really nothing beyond that. Mailman 3 will be bett
It took me a long time to figure out that Mailman's 'virgin' directory
was for messages that Mailman created itself. Is stuff like this
documented somewhere? Is there a developer's guide to Mailman out
there?
--
We're just a Bunch Of Regular Guys, a collective group that's trying
to understand an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Aug 19, 2008, at 9:25 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
I've played with it a little bit, and I think it will be fine. One of
the obvious advantages is the tighter integration with bazaar (I guess
any would be tighter than what we have :)
:)
I think it'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I'm happy to announce a demo import from SourceForge's bug tracker,
> patches tracker, and feature request tracker into Launchpad, and I
> invite you to play with the new issue tracker so that we can decide
> whether or not to com
Brad Knowles writes:
> That implies their client is misconfigured and that should be their problem
> and not ours. Right?
Actually, all existing clients are pretty much broken, since they
don't allow you to enforce your own CSS. But I guess they figure that
nearly all existing users are brok
Terri Oda wrote:
The original version I had used the standard link colours (ie - it
didn't set them), and comments ranged from just general malaise about
the colour scheme of the links to several people who asserted it was
nearly unreadable on their setups.
That implies their client is misco
On 23-Jul-08, at 1:22 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
The latest version is here:
http://terri.zone12.com/mm-website/
So, that's using some red/pink from the logo as link colours as
someone suggested to me.
I really don't want anyone over-riding my own choices for link colors.
The original version I
Terri Oda wrote:
The latest version is here:
http://terri.zone12.com/mm-website/
So, that's using some red/pink from the logo as link colours as someone
suggested to me.
I really don't want anyone over-riding my own choices for link colors.
More suggestions welcome!
Did you want to ment
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've done a bit more work with the site redesign, and updated the
working content I had.
The latest version is here:
http://terri.zone12.com/mm-website/
So, that's using some red/pink from the logo as link colours as
someone suggested to me.
On 4/21/08, Barry Warsaw wrote:
We should probably have some kind of shunt queue culler cron script in
place, either that archives and deletes those files, or just expires
them after a certain amount of time.
That's easy enough to do with cron and find. You tell me what you
want, and I'll
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 21, 2008, at 9:30 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
You could set up a cron to run every hour or some other interval to
efectively do
rm $var_prefix/qfiles/shunt/*.psv
The problem with that is there can occasionally be queue entries
preserved for oth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 21, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
I am happy to announce the release of Mailman 2.1.10.
Congratulations Mark! Long live Mailman 2.2. :)
I will update the web sites.
- -Barry
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Da
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 23, 2007, at 11:04 AM, Dov Zamir wrote:
> I am resending this email, as well as to the other mailing lists,
> since
> I have received zero feedback since sending the original over two
> weeks ago.
>
>
> Should I assume there is no interest
On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 17:29 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>
> >Hi developers,
> >
> >This particular problem is caused by a bug in email 4.0.1 package which
> >was fixed in the most recent subversion repository.
> >http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/email/message.py?re
Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>
>> Hi developers,
>>
>> This particular problem is caused by a bug in email 4.0.1 package which
>> was fixed in the most recent subversion repository.
>> http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/email/message.py?rev=54333&r1=50840&r2=54333
>>
>> Mayb
Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>Hi developers,
>
>This particular problem is caused by a bug in email 4.0.1 package which
>was fixed in the most recent subversion repository.
>http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/email/message.py?rev=54333&r1=50840&r2=54333
>
>Maybe it's time to think of next bug fi
Mark Sapiro wrote:
> I don't think your suggestion is correct. What I am trying to do is get
> the format= and delsp= parameters from only the first text/plain part
> in the message. Often, this will be the only part in which case it
> doesn't matter.
Sorry that I misunderstood. It was a little
Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>
>I think the indent level of this part in Scrubber.py should be
>
> if charset is None:
> charset = part.get_content_charset(lcset)
>+format = part.get_param('format')
>+delsp = part.get_param('delsp')
>
Tokio,
Thanks f
Hi Mark,
I was working this patch on the trunk.
I think the indent level of this part in Scrubber.py should be
if charset is None:
charset = part.get_content_charset(lcset)
+format = part.get_param('format')
+delsp = part.get_param('delsp')
Congratulations, Barry!
I'm very happy to hear that you can spend more time on Mailman.
I also learned by quick search that Canonical is founded by this nice
guy. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shuttleworth
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 28, 2006, at 11:03 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
> On 9/28/06 9:16 PM, Barry Warsaw at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> So, that leads to the question, is there any reason to install
> python 2.5
> while running 2.1.9 or are we fine with 2.3.5 if we are
On 9/28/06 9:16 PM, Barry Warsaw at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sep 28, 2006, at 8:45 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
>
>> This all made me curious. I'm just a user of Mailman on Mac OS X - no
>> development of any sort by me - so I'm good with 2.1.9
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 28, 2006, at 8:45 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
> This all made me curious. I'm just a user of Mailman on Mac OS X - no
> development of any sort by me - so I'm good with 2.1.9 and Python
> 2.3.5 on
> 10.4.7 - but this topic made me look at the Pyth
On 9/28/06 1:13 PM, Stubbs Jeff at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Barry - thanks for the advice
>
> I just wanted to report that Tiger (10.4.7 : ppc), Python 2.5 (from
> the OS X installer), and Mailman 2.1.9 works perfectly. Install went
> without a hitch.
>
> Stumbled a little, setting up virtual
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 28, 2006, at 2:13 PM, Stubbs Jeff wrote:
> Barry - thanks for the advice
>
> I just wanted to report that Tiger (10.4.7 : ppc), Python 2.5 (from
> the OS X installer), and Mailman 2.1.9 works perfectly. Install
> went without a hitch.
>
> S
On Sep 28, 2006, at 12:34 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>> In summary my preferences would be:
>>>
>>> Mailman 2.1.x supported on Python 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5. Drop support
>>> for Python 2.1 and 2.2. We've done this accidentally in Mailman
>>> 2.1.9, so let's make it official.
>>>
>>> Mailman 2.2 suppo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 27, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>> In summary my preferences would be:
>>
>> Mailman 2.1.x supported on Python 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5. Drop support
>> for Python 2.1 and 2.2. We've done this accidentally in Mailman
>> 2.1.9, so let's ma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 27, 2006, at 9:32 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Mailman 2.1.x supported on Python 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5. Drop support
>> for Python 2.1 and 2.2. We've done this accidentally in Mailman
>> 2.1.9, so let's make it official.
>
> Would it be poss
> In summary my preferences would be:
>
> Mailman 2.1.x supported on Python 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5. Drop support
> for Python 2.1 and 2.2. We've done this accidentally in Mailman
> 2.1.9, so let's make it official.
>
> Mailman 2.2 supported on Python 2.4 and 2.5.
+1
--
Tokio Kikuchi, [EMAIL P
On 7/23/06, emf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would sincerely help me if I could test my UI against actual mailman
> pickles to make sure I can deal with vagaries of configuration, etc.
> I'd be happy to provide a script to randomize all users passwords before
> you sent it over, but would pref
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:33:29AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > "William" == William D Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Well damn!!! I am genuinely impressed and appreciative of this
response! Have it saved off in a separate file to study. Mr. Turnbull
has my sincere thanks for
> "William" == William D Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
William> On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:11:22PM +0900, Stephen
William> J. Turnbull wrote:
>> I don't think that is the way that RFC writers in general
>> think.
William> Yes, so I gather.
:-)
William> Which m
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:11:22PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > "William" == William D Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> William> How does the RFC, or the writers thereof, define "user"?
>
> They don't. IMHO (there are those more expert than I on this list)
> anything that
> "William" == William D Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
William> How does the RFC, or the writers thereof, define "user"?
They don't. IMHO (there are those more expert than I on this list)
anything that is normally expected to touch the headers or body of a
message is a "user" for t
On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 13:27 -0500, Neal Groothuis wrote:
> > I'd like to work up an unofficial diff to Mailman 2.1 for people like
> > Stephen who are willing to give it a try on a live site.
>
> I'm not sure this is even necessary.
>
> Ezmlm doesn't touch the Sender: header at all, Majordomo s
On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 18:16 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Neal Groothuis wrote:
> >
> >Mailman is not the originator of the message, so it should
> >not be tampering with the From: or Sender: fields at all.
>
>
> This is arguably not true. Mailman may add a list header and/or list
> footer to the
Neal Groothuis wrote:
>
>Mailman is not the originator of the message, so it should
>not be tampering with the From: or Sender: fields at all.
This is arguably not true. Mailman may add a list header and/or list
footer to the body of the message as well as potentially filtering or
scrubbing vari
Watching this with interest; a newbie learns...
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 01:27:40PM -0500, Neal Groothuis wrote:
> It might be appropriate for Mailman to add Resent-* headers, depending
> on how one reads RFC 2822, 3.6.6. I personally don't think it's
> necessary or useful, since list servers
I'd like to work up an unofficial diff to Mailman 2.1 for people like
Stephen who are willing to give it a try on a live site.
I'm not sure this is even necessary.
Ezmlm doesn't touch the Sender: header at all, Majordomo sets it to the
owner of the list, and (AFAICT) Listserv sets it to the
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 00:00 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Sender doesn't instruct *conformant* MTAs at all, does it? AFAIK the
> only thing that a RFC 2821-conforming MTA looks at is the Return-Path
> header, and it's supposed to remove that.
>
> So this is purely a matter of pragmatic sel
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 19:12 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote:
> I think we need to gather a lot more information about the likely
> outcome from this change, and I think the best way to achieve this is
> through giving admins (either site admins or list admins) the ability
> to set an option and
On 4/29/06 8:00 AM, "Stephen J. Turnbull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sender doesn't instruct *conformant* MTAs at all, does it? AFAIK the
> only thing that a RFC 2821-conforming MTA looks at is the Return-Path
> header, and it's supposed to remove that.
There is no Return-Path: header during t
At 12:00 AM +0900 2006-04-30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Brad> If we need something that will be noticed by other MTAs
> Brad> beyond the envelope sender and the "Return-Path:" &
> Brad> "Errors-To:" headers, then we're going to have to carefully
> Brad> think about this.
>
>
> "Brad" == Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
At 7:50 PM -0400 2006-04-28, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> Whatever else we decide, I don't agree, or at least, it won't
>> help us. $3.6.6 says that Resent-* headers are to be added by
>> a user. It also says that these are purely i
Yes, and it still happens. Apparently, AOL has some filter based on a FROM:
address matching a specific list, and bounces it with an SPF error, which it
clearly is not.
Bob
-- Original Message ---
From: Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Have you tried turning on full person
At 7:50 PM -0400 2006-04-28, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 13:05 -0500, Neal Groothuis wrote:
>
>> As I noted in my previous response, I believe that the correct field (if
>> Mailman were to add a "Sender:" header) to add would be "Resent-Sender".
>>Please see RFC 2822, sectio
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 14:08 -0400, Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ...Trouble similar to a current problem I am having with AOL: they are
> bouncing all email with the
> FROM: address of a specific AOL user, when mailman delivers the
> messages to -any- aol or cs.com
> address.
Have you tried tu
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 13:05 -0500, Neal Groothuis wrote:
> As I noted in my previous response, I believe that the correct field (if
> Mailman were to add a "Sender:" header) to add would be "Resent-Sender".
> Please see RFC 2822, section 3.6.6.
Whatever else we decide, I don't agree, or at le
Now that I have a few minutes to breath ;) I'll try to summarize my
thoughts on this, and then perhaps go back later and follow up to
specific points later in the thread.
I'm sympathetic to ripping out the Sender: field munging. It was always
primarily a workaround for buggy MTAs. If the majorit
Dallas Bethune wrote:
>For our uses just
>changing that list-bounces address to something less ominous looking
>would help.
It definitely looks to me as if something needs to be done. I think
perhaps offering 3 options either to the list admin on a per-list
basis with a site default or just a
Don't forget to consider things like SPF, which I think uses the sender field.
Whatever is used for
SPF _must_ be the domain of the mailman box, or you're gonna run into a pack of
trouble.
...Trouble similar to a current problem I am having with AOL: they are bouncing
all email with the
FROM
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 10:29 -0700, John W. Baxter wrote:
> On 4/28/06 6:06 AM, "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 22:46 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote:
> >
> >> If the previous value of the "Sender:" field is being lost, then
> >> that should be corrected. At the ve
John W. Baxter wrote:
Probably, indeed. But what happens if that header was already "taken" in
the process that brought the message to mailman for distribution to the
list?
As I noted in my previous response, I believe that the correct field (if
Mailman were to add a "Sender:" header) to add
On 4/28/06 6:06 AM, "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 22:46 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote:
>
>> If the previous value of the "Sender:" field is being lost, then
>> that should be corrected. At the very least, the value should be
>> saved in an "Old-Sender:" or "Previo
On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 22:46 -0500, Brad Knowles wrote:
> If the previous value of the "Sender:" field is being lost, then
> that should be corrected. At the very least, the value should be
> saved in an "Old-Sender:" or "Previous-Sender:" or some other
> suitable renamed sender field.
P
imacat wrote:
>>
>>I noted that in the source of mailman 2.1.7 there are 2 lines in
>>bin/mailmanctl:
>>
>>line 421-422
>># Clear our file mode creation umask
>>os.umask(0)
>>
>>Is this intended? Is it the reason why data/bounce-events-?.pck
>>are world-writable?
There
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 09:25 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>
>
>>In usual mailman qrunner execs, stderr is logged into logs/errors. It
>>is the additional tee_to_real_stderr in LogStdErr() setting which wants
>>to print the error into real stderr.
>>
>>Isn't it safe to put t
On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 09:25 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
> In usual mailman qrunner execs, stderr is logged into logs/errors. It
> is the additional tee_to_real_stderr in LogStdErr() setting which wants
> to print the error into real stderr.
>
> Isn't it safe to put the tee_to_real_stderr value
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
>
>
>>Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>
>>
>>
File "/usr/lib/python2.3/uu.py", line 139, in decode
sys.stderr.write("Warning: %s\n" % str(v))
File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Logging/MultiLogger.py", line 45,
in write
>
On Jan 14, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
> Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
>
>>> File "/usr/lib/python2.3/uu.py", line 139, in decode
>>> sys.stderr.write("Warning: %s\n" % str(v))
>>> File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Logging/MultiLogger.py", line 45,
>>> in write
>>> _logexc(logger, msg)
>>> Fi
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 09:22 +0900, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
> May be we should set this default in Defaults.py.in in the next release
> of 2.1.7. Thoughts?
It's probably a good idea, but also as Stephen says, it might be a good
idea to shorten the filename (keeping the extension) even when this
valu
On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 11:52, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> The real issue here seems to be that the import from mm_cfg done in the
> driver script is inadequately protected. The driver script
> print_traceback definition contains
>
> try:
> from Mailman.mm_cfg import VERSION
> except Impor
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 08:14, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
> I believe I could finally fix the bug and commited in CVS. IMHO, python
> re.escape() should escape special characters only -- I can't find '%' in
> special character list in the manual.
Cool. Sounds like a bug to me. I'll probably spin rc4 i
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 05:05, Brad Knowles wrote:
>
>>At 12:41 AM -0400 2005-05-13, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Thanks for the quick heads up. I think I just fixed it. At least I
>>> /hope/ so, 'cause I'm going to bed. ;)
>>
>> So far as I know, we had been running a
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 05:05, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 12:41 AM -0400 2005-05-13, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the quick heads up. I think I just fixed it. At least I
> > /hope/ so, 'cause I'm going to bed. ;)
>
> So far as I know, we had been running a plain-jane 2.1.6rc3
> ins
At 12:41 AM -0400 2005-05-13, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Thanks for the quick heads up. I think I just fixed it. At least I
> /hope/ so, 'cause I'm going to bed. ;)
So far as I know, we had been running a plain-jane 2.1.6rc3
installation on this machine. Is the fix for the subject line
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 00:23, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> All of a sudden, within the last hour or so, subject_prefix on both
> mailman-users@python.org and mailman-developers@python.org is being
> added to replies even though it's already present resulting in
> doubling and tripling (so far not more) of t
On 24 Apr 2005 at 8:31, Bryan Carbonnell wrote:
> I have just uploaded a patch that will make the web UI for MM 2.1.6rc1
> XHTML 1 strict compliant. This patch allows for some CSS formatting as
> well.
>
> I have tried to make all the pages compliant, but I may have missed
> some combinations of
Hi all,
Our company is looking for Mailman developers to help us to setup our Forums
project. We are based in Thailand so anyone who knows somebody in the region
that can help us is most appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
John
_
John Kromodimedjo
ICT Progra
94 matches
Mail list logo
