Barry,
>> Other than that, I think I've checked with i18n plain text message
>> deliveries for both regular and digest. Still to go are mime
>> multipart
>> messages and archives.
>>
>> I've also added a comment on Testing Mailman 2.2 wiki page how to test
>> run the 2.2 code.
>
> Thanks, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 3, 2007, at 1:13 AM, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
> Hi Barry,
Hi Tokio,
Man, I don't know what happened but I just got /plastered/ with email
this week. Between that and work, I haven't even touched the code. :/
> Since we at Japanese universitie
Mark Sapiro writes:
> I think Dan must be thinking of not-metoo, but note that even ensuring
> that not-metoo is off won't do the job for gmail users thanks to
> gmail's 'feature' of not showing 'duplicate' messages.
Yeah, but that's irrelevant to use of no-dupes, because gmail is
keying off a
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>Dan MacNeil writes:
>
> > Stephen J. Turnbull quoted out of context:
> > > I see your point, but why won't my suggestion of defaulting the per
> > > user no-dupes to "on" do fine from that point of view?
>
> > For my selfish purposes, "no-dupes" off is a better default
Stephen J. Turnbull quoted out of context:
> I see your point, but why won't my suggestion of defaulting the per
> user no-dupes to "on" do fine from that point of view?
For my selfish purposes, "no-dupes" off is a better default setting.
Without a copy of the message to their mailbox, many of my
Dan MacNeil writes:
> Stephen J. Turnbull quoted out of context:
> > I see your point, but why won't my suggestion of defaulting the per
> > user no-dupes to "on" do fine from that point of view?
> For my selfish purposes, "no-dupes" off is a better default setting.
> Without a copy of the m
Barry Warsaw writes:
> I think you're both right :). Mailman 2.1 will strip recipients from
> the CC header if explicitly named recipients are members of the list
> and have nodup set. But Mailman won't strip To headers, nor juggle
> CC and To headers after stripping.
Ah, right. I ra
