[Mailman-Developers] Re: Bounce removal parameters default values

[Barry Warsaw]

On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 10:20, Greg Stark wrote:
> "John A. Martin" <jam at jamux.com> writes:
> 
> > If any mail is rejected or bounced (ie, initially accepted for
> > delivery but later a DSN is returned indicating a delivery failure)
> > then that is a delivery failure.  If you do not like what your
> > receiving mail systems reject or bounce that is not a Mailman problem.
> 
> I like very much that the mail systems reject virus and worm mails. I don't
> like that mailman extrapolates from that failure to assuming the mailbox is
> broken and it should unsubscribe it. That's bogus.
> 
> Mailman should not take any such drastic action purely on the basis of a
> bounce from a message with content it didn't control. It has no idea *why* the
> message bounced and no idea whether it means future messages will bounce or
> not.

I've been swamped, but I'll just quickly chime in that we've seen lots
of unintentional unsubs since moving python-list over to Mailman 2.1.3. 
Unintentional means that the person's mailbox is still valid, and they
still want to be on the list, but they got disabled without
understanding why.  I consider it important to fix this for 2.1.4,
although I haven't decided how yet.  One thing will be to include a
bounce example with re-enable notifications.  A second thing may be to
send probes when the bounce threshold has been reached, but I need to
think more about the exact machinery for that and whether that's
appropriate for a patch release or not.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/attachments/20031023/f5e4b122/attachment.bin