At 4:46 PM -0800 2004/01/21, Somuchfun wrote:
Is there a problem to send out the emails one by one with individual To:
addresses and then add a header or a mail merge field in the footer without
creating bounce addresses that most MTA do not allow or understand?
No MTA ever created should ever
On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 11:56, Somuchfun wrote:
> Hello Barry,
> Let me try to explain why the additional header is so important.
> When you use large lists with lots of traffic to AOL they can set you on
> something that is called an "feedback loop". This loop creates automated
> emails from AOL's p
Brad,
While I understand part of your rationale this is really creating a big
problem for people running large lists and try to handle their email traffic
in an ethical way.
Is there a problem to send out the emails one by one with individual To:
addresses and then add a header or a mail merge fiel
At 2:56 PM -0800 2004/01/21, Somuchfun wrote:
Of course I could just add a mail merge code in the footer of the message
but that only seems to work with full VERP enabled in mailman and the
slowdown is so dramatic that it is no longer feasible for a list of 50,000
or more.
If you're not using
Hello Barry,
Let me try to explain why the additional header is so important.
When you use large lists with lots of traffic to AOL they can set you on
something that is called an "feedback loop". This loop creates automated
emails from AOL's postmaster about people on one of your list (as an ISP)
w
Jeff Warnica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 21.01.04:
>> we want all messages sent by moderated members or non-members to our
>> CVS list be automatically redirected to our Dev list (rather than
>> really moderating or discarding them).
>> Only a specific address (in fact the list address itself) a
I suggest to add an option in 'pending moderator requests' to send not
only a copy of the message to list-owner (as it is now), but a copy of
the message with list-owners/moderators comments in case the message is
rejected.
Regards
ak
___
Mailman-Dev
On Tue 2004-01-20 19:02:54 -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 12:43, Chris Boulter wrote:
> > I'm using Mailman 2.1.2. We have sync_members running in a loop from a
> > daemon, syncing ~500 lists every few hours. Of these, half a dozen lists are
> > failing (and my daemon has to for
Dear Mailman developers,
A user ("[EMAIL PROTECTED]", cc'ed) who wanted to subscribe to one of
our mailing lists received a
>> Bug in Mailman version 2.1.4
>>
>> We're sorry, we hit a bug!
and sent me the full message, I've found the same message in
mailman's data/logs/error file,
and
Simone Piunno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 21.01.04:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2004 23:41, Michael Heydekamp wrote:
>> I'm not too familiar with the format and the logic of mailman.po
>> (although I made some successful changes and corrections), but it
>> might have to do with the 'fuzzy' line here
Hi!
could any one explain me what's intended for the shunt directory in
mailman?.. just curiosity...
Thanks in advance,
--
Saludos,
--
|Juan Enrique Gomez Perez
|Metropoli2000 Networks, S.L.
| Phone: +34 914250023 Fax: +34 9
El lun, 19-01-2004 a las 21:42, Somuchfun escribió:
Hi!
I'm afraid it's normal, my smallest list is about 20.000 and it's almost
impossible to handle, and i dont wanna talk about others with more than
200.000 users
Best,
> Whenever I have a mailing list send out 30,000 emails python takes u
12 matches
Mail list logo
