i know why mailman is written in python - python is akin to binary
distribution, it is nearly impossible to read due to its syntax
via indentation crap. g.
--
Greg McCarrollhttp://217.34.97.146/~gem/
On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 08:47, Andy Wardley wrote:
> So rather than re-write mailman in Perl
i'm wondering how much work this would be.
tasks i see are:
web admin interface
- not entirely trivial, but this is the kind of thing that a lot of us
will be doing all the time. a nicely organ
After the recent outage on our box I'm left with the output of dumpdb for a
couple of my mailman lists.
I want to reimport the settings from these which appears to be possible
according to this ...
http://msgs.securepoint.com/cgi-bin/get/mailman-users-0110/328/1.html
"Restoring a d
On 6 Jul 2002, alex wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 08:47, Andy Wardley wrote:
> > So rather than re-write mailman in Perl
> i think it would be possible to get something working in a weekend, and
> then open it up to patches and get it releaseable within a few weeks...
>
&g
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 08:47, Andy Wardley wrote:
> > So rather than re-write mailman in Perl
> i'm wondering how much work this would be.
You don't think that, since mailman is perfectly worka
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 04:28:18PM +0100, alex said:
> On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 08:47, Andy Wardley wrote:
> > So rather than re-write mailman in Perl
>
> i'm wondering how much work this would be.
>
> tasks i see are:
I'd also like to see a web mail interface (lot
On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 11:07:37AM +0100, Rob Partington said:
> Perl people as insular protectionist loonies?
But it's *true*!
Seriously, there's some features missing in Mailman that I'd really like
(see above mail(s)) and which other people would like. I'd patch
nly
way to be.
>
> Seriously, there's some features missing in Mailman that I'd really like
> (see above mail(s)) and which other people would like. I'd patch Mailman
> if I could code Python but I think, actually, in the long run, it would
> be quicker to code up a
On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 11:26:00AM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
> Groups to host mailing lists because of this) and the ability to set
> reply-to munging on a per-subscriber basis.
How do you see this working? Some people get munged, and others not?
What happens when a person gets a non-munged repl
On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 16:31, Richard Clamp wrote:
> The only thing I can think of as worse than seeing a bunch of
> programmers write a clone of mailman just so it's in their pet
> language, is to then see them fill it with random crap that the
> mailman people didn't even
tart getting spurious unfiltered replies in their inbox? Sounds
> annoying... Perhaps I'm missing some link here.
Well, little me is subscribed to n mailing lists, both with mailman and
majordomo. I notice no difference as a user, btw. My main 'problem'
is that,for one of the mail
On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 20:37, Natalie S. Ford wrote:
> Well, little me is subscribed to n mailing lists, both with mailman and
> majordomo. I notice no difference as a user, btw. My main 'problem'
> is that,for one of the mailman lists, mutt replies to the sender but
> for
On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 08:37:20PM +0100, Natalie S. Ford wrote:
>
> My main 'problem' is that,for one of the mailman lists, mutt replies
> to the sender but for all others (london.pm included), mutt replies
> to the list.
Mutt deals with mailing lists flexibly. B
> storage
> - i'd be in favour of using an object-oriented layer such as Tangram or
> Class::DBI for this.
Yep, or even more fun, pixie:
http://opensource.fotango.com/modules.html
Pierre Denis
On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 11:07:37AM +0100, Rob Partington wrote:
> You don't think that, since mailman is perfectly workable
I don't necessarily agree.
Mailman is a really great product on the outside, but from what I've
seen, it's rather sucky on the inside. My first r
Simon Wistow wrote:
> Seriously, there's some features missing in Mailman that I'd really like
> (see above mail(s)) and which other people would like. I'd patch Mailman
> if I could code Python but I think, actually, in the long run, it would
> be quicker to code up a
On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 06:22:50PM +0100, Paul Makepeace said:
> How do you see this working? Some people get munged, and others not?
It's basically a way of getting round the "This mailing list should be
reply-to munged. Oh no it shouldn't. Oh yes it should." wars. The user
makes a choice.
(vo
I admin a couple of mailing lists using mailman, nice and simple for
small lists and easy to let someone else run there own list however for
large lists one or two activities are tedious. For example when an
address starts bouncing, mailman sets that address to "no-mail" rather
than
I just realised one of my sites was getting a lot of 404s and it was
because I switched mailman to yearly rather than monthly a while back
so all the search engine-cached links of the form 2001-Month_name
were invalid.
So I wanted to redirect them to the year's thread index instead, and
fi
Tony Kennick sent the following bits through the ether:
> What I am asking you guys is, before I start by writing some perl which
> takes the output of ./dumpdb and turns it into an internal data
> structure is there any way of talking to the python "marshalled
> dictionary" direct.
Convince the
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Leon Brocard wrote:
> Tony Kennick sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > What I am asking you guys is, before I start by writing some perl which
> > takes the output of ./dumpdb and turns it into an internal data
> > structure is there any way of talking to the pyt
On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results --
> SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
> SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
> SPAM: See http://spamassa
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 11:26:20AM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results --
> > SPAM: End of SpamAssassin results -
> >
>
> Wahay, spamas
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Wahay, spamassassin proved to be more reliable than human inspection
> > shocker!!!
> Of couse the only people who'll see this are those foolish enough to put
> the Mail::Spamassassin check after filtering out mailing lis
24 matches
Mail list logo
