On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:27 PM, R.Smith <rsmith at rsweb.co.za> wrote:
> > Ah, thank you, all makes sense now. If you change the first option to YES > then nobody else's quirky reply-to headers will get into the list, and the > second option remains as is (it should be setting the standard > @mailinglists reply-to field) - this should solve the duplication issue, > but if it is disagreeable to anyone, more consideration is needed. > I almost don't want to even speak of this for fear that this issue will raise it's ugly head again. Per the Mailmain documentation ( http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-admin/node11.html): Beware! Reply-To: munging is considered a religious issue and the policies > you set here can ignite some of the most heated off-topic flame wars on > your mailing lists. We'll try to stay as agnostic as possible, but our > biases may still peak through. > That's as much as I'll say about that. > Thanks again Mike for the list maintenance and the quick replies! > My pleasure. The SQLite community is a delight to work with. It's always seemed to be composed of intelligent, well-behaved people. > > > > >> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:04 PM, R.Smith <rsmith at rsweb.co.za> wrote: >> >> >>> On 2015-03-03 12:42 AM, Darren Duncan wrote: >>> >>> I think that what needs to be done is for each foo at sqlite.org to return >>>> an error/undeliverable message if someone sends a message to it, citing >>>> that all messages must be explicitly sent to the corresponding >>>> foo at mailinglists.sqlite.org. That should handily solve the problem. -- >>>> Darren Duncan >>>> >>>> I see where you are coming from, but if the Reply-To field contains 2 >>> email addresses and then the server penalizes you for using one of them, >>> that might go down in history as the most-evil mailing-list quirk of all >>> time. >>> >>> As to Mike's post - the dual mailing-list's reason for being is very >>> clear >>> and welcomed, no qualms there, just the Reply-to duplication that is >>> quirky. I read all forum emails, I do not recall any multi-person >>> decision >>> to add this dual Reply-To thing, however memory is not my strength so I'm >>> happy with the explanation - but I am wondering - is this done and >>> dusted? >>> Is there any chance we might re-open the discussion now that real-World >>> scenarios have set in? >>> >>> It's an extremely minor irritation and will cause a few extra >>> mail-traffic >>> items at its worst - the only real casualty being my OCD, but I can't >>> help >>> thinking there is not a single good reason to keep the situation (unless >>> someone can show the opposite). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2015-03-02 10:37 AM, Mike Owens wrote: >>>> >>>> For what it is worth, the move to mailinglists.sqlite.org is a result >>>>> of >>>>> the Mailman web interface having to be hosted under the following two >>>>> constraints: >>>>> >>>>> 1. It must be on port 80 >>>>> 2. It cannot be on sqlite.org port 80 >>>>> >>>>> I explained this reasoning in a previous email. The short version is >>>>> because we are using two web servers on the VM that hosts both the >>>>> sqlite.org website and fossil repos (althttpd) and the Mailman web >>>>> interface (Apache). We previously did this on a single IP where mailman >>>>> was >>>>> on port 8080. However, we had a significant number of complaints from >>>>> people who could not reach the Mailman web interface via >>>>> sqlite.org:8080 >>>>> due to firewall restrictions in their respective locations. So we did >>>>> what >>>>> we could to move it to port 80. >>>>> >>>>> So to satisfy these two constraints, mailinglists.sqlite.org was born. >>>>> Unless somebody else knows better, Mailman does not allow one to use >>>>> two >>>>> domains for a given list. Either something will screw up with the mail >>>>> routing or in the web interface if you try to use more than one. You >>>>> have >>>>> to pick one domain and stick with it. Thus I could not continue to >>>>> support >>>>> both the previous sqlite.org (:8080) domain and the new >>>>> mailinglists.sqlite.org (:80) for the users list. So I made the move >>>>> from >>>>> the one to the other. >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the reply-to policy. I honestly don't remember the reasoning >>>>> behind it. I know there was a big long discussion about it in the past >>>>> (search the list) and after the dust settled we chose the current >>>>> policy >>>>> and that is the way it is configured today. I do believe the policy >>>>> was >>>>> a >>>>> result of the consensus of the mailing list users. I can say that we do >>>>> everything we can to make most of the people happy most of the time. >>>>> That >>>>> is the very reason we made this change to begin with -- to make it >>>>> possible >>>>> for everyone to use the list. It would have been easier to just keep >>>>> things >>>>> the same and let the people who can't reach port 8080 deal with it, but >>>>> we >>>>> did what we had to to make it accessible for them as well. There are a >>>>> lot >>>>> of variables in the system and we juggle them as best we can. >>>>> >>>>> Any feedback or suggestions are always welcome. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:18 AM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 12:45 +0200, R.Smith wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ok, I've found the source of the list duplications. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Some emails (Such as the one by J.K. Lowden 2-March-2015 re: >>>>>>> Characters >>>>>>> corrupt after importing...) contains a "Reply-To" field in the header >>>>>>> with both list addresses which must have sneaked in there due to some >>>>>>> automatic list feature. (By "Both" I mean the old: >>>>>>> sqlite-users at sqlite.org and the new: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org) >>>>>> >>>>>> You don't need that, do you? Just hitting Reply All to a message which >>>>>> is: >>>>>> To: sqlite-users at sqlite.org >>>>>> Reply-To: sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org >>>>>> >>>>>> would generate a message which ends up going to both, wouldn't it? >>>>>> >>>>>> (I can't easily test; I've configured my mailer to ignore abusive >>>>>> Reply-To: headers from mailing lists where it can detect them, so my >>>>>> Reply and Reply All buttons actually do what I *ask* them to.) >>>>>> >>>>>> But looking at the first message in the 'PhD Student' thread, it >>>>>> appears >>>>>> just as in my example above. And John KcKown's response of 26 Feb 2015 >>>>>> 07:16:47 -0600 is indeed to both addresses, as if he'd done the >>>>>> correct >>>>>> thing and simply hit 'Reply All'. >>>>>> >>>>>> I usually use the "Reply to List" button (Thunderbird) which replies >>>>>> >>>>>>> correctly, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note that that is considered extremely anti-social in many cases, >>>>>> because it cuts some people out of discussions entirely. See >>>>>> http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html for a full discussion. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> dwmw2 >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> sqlite-users mailing list >>>> sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org >>>> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> sqlite-users mailing list >>> sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org >>> http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >>> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > -- Mike
