On Tuesday 20 July 2010 16:50:34 Florian Fuchs wrote:
>[...]
>> For example: At the moment an API request to
> /3.0/lists/listn...@example.org exposes only some basic list
> information. Would it be a good idea to let this URL expose more list
> details (i.e. all list settings) or would it be bette
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 16:55:38 Mark Sapiro wrote:
> I looked at your patch yesterday. It seems good, but it's missing a
> critical piece. It has to increment DATA_FILE_VERSION in
> Mailman/Version.py. Otherwise, the code in Mailman/versions.py to add
> the include_sender_header attribute to exi
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 16:24:07 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 04:07 PM, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> >Any chance to have my patch applied to 2.1 (and/or 2.2)? I ask
> >because I have to take care of some mailing lists on a shared server
> >and I doubt that the admi
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 04:15:46 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jun 29, 2010, at 06:19 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> >On 6/29/2010 6:15 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >> It may just be time to ditch the Sender rewriting in Mailman 3. I
> >> don't think a reading of RFC 5322 can justify it, and I'm pretty
> >> s
Hi folks,
every now and then the Sender header added by Mailman is discussed on this
list. Patches float through the net. The old FAQ is gone but for some
reason I remember that it was point 2.3. Guess I read it too often.
Because every now and then I get bitten by the header breaking someb
