--On Sunday, October 24, 2004 10:44 PM -0400 Barry Warsaw
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 08:50, Tom Neff wrote:
in htmlformat.py . I googled this and on a couple of Python forums I
found the suggestion than an un-escaped percent sign had found its way
into a templat
I notice that on one of my lists, a moderator had been using the "Add
(address) to a sender filter" checkbox on a lot of pending moderator
requests, so that a substantial list of automatic-discard addresses had
been built *without* ever using the Sender Filters admin page.
When I went to the Se
I had written:
> In the meantime, any site admin who wants to do this kind of cleaning can
> easily insert "formail" or "reformail" into the alias pipeline for the
> posting address. These are utilities supplied with "procmail" and
> "maildrop" respectively, and widely available on the Net.
to wh
--On Friday, June 13, 2003 5:32 PM -0400 Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The other case can be made that retaining Received headers has very
> practical benefits. For example, it occasionally happens that a piece
> spam sneaks through our filters (I /know/! Imagine that. ;). Then
> pyt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John A. Martin) wrote:
>[Roman Sinelnikov wrote:]
>> Dear colleagues, one more idea, it would be very convenient
>> to have an optional cutting of "Received:" headers in any
>> e-mail message before its sending by Mailman to the list
>> members.
>
> Rfc2822 Section 3.6.6
Concis
One idea would be to put a spam-style filter on the inbound invite-confirm
mail processor, so that phrases like "out of the office" could be caught.
Thanks to Barry for moving the sourceforge tracker to the new list!
___
Mailman-Developers mailing list
Barry wrote:
That's definitely the /last/ thing I wanted to do! I think it's worse
now because 2.1 is out, people are finding it, playing with it, and
are submitting bugs and patches against it. ...
I hope I didn't sound too ungrateful or anything.
I don't know whether or how my suggested solu
It completely sucks, and has completely sucked ever since the decision was
made a few months ago, that Mailman-Developers gets Cc'd on every
Sourceforge update. I'm sure Barry (or whoever) felt they were doing a
service, but it has practically killed discussion here and cost us many,
many kilo
This is hardly worth filing a bug or patch, I just noticed that in
templates/en/verify.txt
under the latest 2.1, it says:
If you do not wish to be subscribed from this list,
please simply...
"Subscribed from" is ungrammatical, probably this text was boilerplated
from something that said "re
This is only peripherally a mailman development issue. :)
I use all three steps, in this order:
- virus scan+block (inflex/uvscan)
- demime
- members-only posting
As a result, the worst I have ever had is a short, stripped text component
appearing mysteriously on a list. And that happened b
Peter W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I guess I was a little afraid that MTA's would get lost matching up
>> separately-issued RCPT TO: and OVRD commands that were supposed to
>> function as logical pairs.
>
> Yes, that makes sense. But couldn't that be clarified in the new
> RFC/draft?
yes, it
Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I will leave the ethical debates to others, but if you need to clean
>> up messages before approving them through, this patch lets you do it.
>> Works for me on 2.0.6
>
> Any chance we can get something like
12 matches
Mail list logo
