On Feb 13, 2008 7:59 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Moving to Mailman-Developers per BAW. CC to -Users; Reply-To set to
> -Developers only.
I love being in an atmosphere where people know what they do. Proper
mail & list handling is not too much of a surprise on these lists
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> If somebody knows offhand how to find the archived discussions for the
> RFC, please post an URL.
The RFC says it was discussed on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg05940.html Seems to be the
thread root for the last dis
Moving to Mailman-Developers per BAW. CC to -Users; Reply-To set to
-Developers only.
Barry Warsaw writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Please see RFC 5064: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5064.txt
Argh. You'd think they'd get in touch with the maintainers and users
of the most popular mailing list softwa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 13, 2008, at 8:48 AM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 05:35:21AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> This is one nice thing about SpamAssassin: it tells you which rules
>> were triggered.
>
> This reminds me of Mailman's most an
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 05:35:21AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> This is one nice thing about SpamAssassin: it tells you which rules
> were triggered.
This reminds me of Mailman's most annoying reason for holding a
message, the 'suspicious header' error/warning. It doesn't say what
the head
