[Mailman-Developers] Killing off Pipermail and the effects on scrubbing in Mailman 3

[Mark Sapiro]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 3/15/2012 10:41 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> 
> We can still scrub messages of unwanted content type, but we can't
> save those parts on the file system and calculate a URL into
> Pipermail to display them.


There are two things going on. There is content filtering, i.e.,
removal from the message of parts with unwanted MIME types or filename
extensions. These parts are simply removed by pipeline/mime_delete.py
(which probably needs some changes ported from 2.1, aargh...).

Then there is what pipeline/scrubber.py does with the remaining
message which is remove those message parts which can't be rendered
well in a flat, text/plain message and store them aside and replace
them by links in the message. The part we can't do in MM 3 is
calculate a URL to display/download them.


> I can think of a few ways to handle this.
> 
> The easiest thing to do, and what I will probably do in my 
> 'death-to-pipermail' branch is to simply scrub out the unwanted
> parts *after* a copy of the message is sent to the archive queue,
> but *before* the message is sent to the digest, usenet, and
> outgoing queues.


I'm not sure about the *before* with respect to usenet and digest and
certainly outgoing. Currently in 2.1, we don't scrub (as opposed to
content filter) non-digest deliveries unless scrub_nondigest is Yes.
We maybe should just drop that option.

We also don't scrub messages for the MIME digest.

I also don't think we scrub messages destined for usenet. I think we
let usenet worry about that in the same way we propose to let whatever
archiver is configured worry about it.

I don't see a need to handle these differently in MM 3.


[...]
> For now, I'm going to try to implement sending an unscrubbed copy
> of the message to the archivers and just throwing up our hands for
> the copy of the message sent to the list members.  The nice
> side-effect of this is that it makes the scrubber *way* simpler!


Perhaps we could keep the scrubber as is except for modifying it to
not store scrubbed parts and put some kind of apology in the message
rather than the link to the no longer stored content.

Then my lp:~msapiro/mailman/scrubber-fix branch would still be relevant ;)

- -- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

iD4DBQFPY3QuVVuXXpU7hpMRAkN2AKCVzhwvBUITlLVgDMwg+V+da0cyJACXed7Q
jAvaD7jeN2/4armc/nIxBw==
=MsB3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----