Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On 16 Jul 2011, at 07:18, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Barry Warsaw writes: > >> Do you really think it needs to be configurable? I mean, if we >> can't think of a reason to not make it 5xx, why not just wait for >> the first wishlist bug report? :) > > No, on second thought after reviewing t

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

Barry Warsaw writes: > Do you really think it needs to be configurable? I mean, if we > can't think of a reason to not make it 5xx, why not just wait for > the first wishlist bug report? :) No, on second thought after reviewing the codes, the only appropriate 5xx code is 550. So there's no

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 15, 2011, at 09:23 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: >A configurable reply could provide a hint along the 550 like this: > >550 See: http://list.example.com/550/listname > >The listname ressource could inform why the list was retired e.g. because it >was relocated or closed or where to

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 13, 2011, at 04:51 PM, Paul Wise wrote: >By bounce I meant SMTP-time rejection, sounds like the LMTP stuff >provides that (and mailman 2 doesn't use that IIRC). Correct. >Temporarily failing lists were not an objective. Cool, I think we're agreed on that. >The design of list objects see

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

* Barry Warsaw : > >OTOH, I can imagine that for some purposes you might want a different > >status code, and I don't see any good reason for making that > >configurable and then restricting it to 5xx. Rather, document it as > >"this SHOULD be a 5xx code (in the RFC 2119 sense, ie, with > >suffici

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 13, 2011, at 01:34 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >Barry Warsaw writes: > > > But maybe the OP has a different use case in mind and we could have a need > > for > > both a long-term, permanently failing retired lists, and shorter term, > > temporarily failing disabled lists. > >I don't rea

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

HI Paul, or all others who want to get involved into mm3 WebUI development. I'm closly listening your dicsussion. The WebUI is work in progress and there is nothing stable yet. However if you're interested taking a look at the dev snippets take a look at the following branches: https://code.edge.l

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

HI Paul, or all others who want to get involved into mm3 WebUI development. I'm closly listening your dicsussion. The WebUI is work in progress and there is nothing stable yet. However if you're interested taking a look at the dev snippets take a look at the following branches: https://code.edge.l

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > It sounds like a lot, but I'd think it's only a day or two of work, and I'm > happy to answer questions, review code, etc. I would like to get the design right first, after reading the full thread a couple of times, some thoughts: By bounce

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On 12 Jul 2011, at 16:11, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jul 12, 2011, at 01:06 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote: > >> Bouncing certainly is suboptimal, since it may create collateral spam. Better >> to reject the message at SMTP time with a 5xx response than to bounce. > > That's an interesting take on it. Th

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

Barry Warsaw writes: > But maybe the OP has a different use case in mind and we could have a need > for > both a long-term, permanently failing retired lists, and shorter term, > temporarily failing disabled lists. I don't really understand under what circumstances a list owner would want to

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 12, 2011, at 08:52 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > 550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable (e.g., mailbox > not found, no access, or command rejected for policy reasons) > > Codes in

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

* Lindsay Haisley : > On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 17:23 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > > Is disabling a list a temporary measure? If it is, should the server reply a > > temporary error? > > In my humble opinion, an intentionally disabled list should cause the > mail system to generate a 500 class

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 17:23 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > Is disabling a list a temporary measure? If it is, should the server reply a > temporary error? In my humble opinion, an intentionally disabled list should cause the mail system to generate a 500 class error (permanent error). 400 cl

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

* Barry Warsaw : > On Jul 12, 2011, at 01:06 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote: > > >Bouncing certainly is suboptimal, since it may create collateral spam. Better > >to reject the message at SMTP time with a 5xx response than to bounce. > > That's an interesting take on it. The LMTP server in Mailman could

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

Hi Barry, it's just a matter of seconds to add this enabled flag to the django webui, just let me know once it is in core. Am Dienstag, den 12.07.2011, 11:10 -0400 schrieb Barry Warsaw: > On Jul 11, 2011, at 06:37 PM, Paul Wise wrote: > > >With our current setup the disabled (or "graveyarded") l

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 12, 2011, at 01:06 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote: >Bouncing certainly is suboptimal, since it may create collateral spam. Better >to reject the message at SMTP time with a 5xx response than to bounce. That's an interesting take on it. The LMTP server in Mailman could reject messages addressed to

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 11, 2011, at 06:37 PM, Paul Wise wrote: >With our current setup the disabled (or "graveyarded") list is removed >from the /var/lib/mailman/lists dir and the aliases regenerated, so >the MTA bounces messages to it and the admin interface for it cannot >be logged into. Disabled lists are list

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

> > I think bouncing at the MTA is slightly sub-optimal and that mailman > could generate a more informative bounce indicating how to contact the > server admin to get the list revived. Probably in the web interface > there could be a "disabled lists" category. Server admins would > probably want

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I've thought about this on and off over the years and still think it's a good > idea.  No, MM3 does not have such a thing yet. ... > Yep Ok, great. > but I'd like to understand the semantics first.  Do messages to the list > get bounced, an

Re: [Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

On Jul 11, 2011, at 12:22 AM, Paul Wise wrote: >For the Indymedia Mailman 2 install, we have a patch that allowed list >disabling (and later re-enabling). Disabled lists had their >settings/archives saved, did not accept mail and were listed on a >separate page to listinfo. For a long-lived large

[Mailman-Developers] MM3: list disabling/enabling?

Hi all, For the Indymedia Mailman 2 install, we have a patch that allowed list disabling (and later re-enabling). Disabled lists had their settings/archives saved, did not accept mail and were listed on a separate page to listinfo. For a long-lived large mailman server serving local groups in many