From stinga at wolf-rock.com  Sat Feb  1 04:58:14 2020
From: stinga at wolf-rock.com (stinga)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:58:14 +0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] acceptable_aliases does not seem to work (or
 more likely I don't understand) V2.1.23
In-Reply-To: <1b39a85e-f70f-c298-b5af-4cc0bf63b5e9@msapiro.net>
References: <60a04924-5d22-3304-e679-a0f6bd046a25@wolf-rock.com>
 <1b39a85e-f70f-c298-b5af-4cc0bf63b5e9@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <dde9c11e-b668-e71d-99af-8da9bbb02f7a@wolf-rock.com>

On 01/02/2020 02:26, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 1/30/20 7:29 PM, stinga wrote:
>> G'day all,
>>
>> I can't seem to get acceptable_aliases to work...
>>
>>
>> (domain names changed to protect the innocent, but all match up)
>>
>> comm at lists.lf.me = List email address
>> info at lf.me = Google group (google group has one email address which 
>> is comm at lists.lf.me
>> info at lf.me is a member of the mailman list and is set for nomail
>>
>> User another at domain.com sends email to info at lf.me
>>
>> List receives email and bounces with:
>>
>> ???? List:??? comm at lists.lf.me
>> ???? From:??? another at domain.com
>> ???? Subject: Testing
>> ???? Reason:? Post by non-member to a members-only list
>>
>> The above is correct as user another at domain.com is not a member of 
>> the mailman list
>
>
> And that is the entire issue. acceptable_aliases and 
> require_explicit_destination have nothing to do with this.
>
Yeah, that dawned on me shortly after sending. :-)
>
>> In the email header there is
>> To: <info at lf.me>
>>
>> I have in acceptable_aliases (tried various things)
>> info at lf.me
>> "info at lf.me"
>> .*info at lf.me.*
>>
>> and require_explicit_destination is yes
>>
>> I believe that should allow email sent to info at lf.me to be accepted 
>> by the list, maybe I am reading this all wrong?
>
>
> All that does is avoid the message's being held for "implicit 
> destination" it doesn't bypass other checks.
>
>
Yeah, that dawned on me soon after hitting send, I have removed all of 
the stuff in the setup

>> If I am doing this wrong how do I get a google email to send to 
>> mailman and be accepted?
>
> There are a few of choices.
>
> You can set Privacy options... -> Sender filters -> 
> generic_nonmember_action to Accept in order to accept posts from any 
> nonmember, but you may not want that.
No don't want that
>
> You can ensure that everyone sending mail to info at lf.me is a member of 
> the comm at lists.lf.me list.
Can't do this really
>
> You can make use of the fact that mailman considers a post to be from 
> a member if any of the From:, Reply-To: Sender: or envelope sender 
> addresses is a list member. Posts from google groups generally have no 
> Sender: header, and the envelope sender is something like 
> 'info+bncbcn2p7unuujrbfxhspsakgqe7gew6fa at googlegroups.com' where the 
> 'bncbcn2p7unuujrbfxhspsakgqe7gew6fa' may not be constant. However, 
> messages from Google Groups have a
>
> Reply-To: groupname at googlegroups.com
I don't have googlegroup in the email anywhere.
And the Reply-To: is the original sender in my example: another at domain.com
>
> header. If that address is a member of your list, it should be OK. You 
> say info at lf.me is a member of your list. Is that an address you 
> control which forwards to the google group?. If so, you want to make 
> groupname at googlegroups.com a member of your list set to nomail. If in 
> fact by info at lf.me you mean the actual groupname at googlegroups.com 
> address, then I don't know what the problem is.
>
info at lf.me is a member of the list info at lf.me is the actual googlegroup 
email, so not forwarded to the group but is the email you - hmm.. 
thinking.....


The only google strings are:

me at shark:~$ grep -i google blobby
 ?helo=mail-wr1-f70.google.com;
Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com
Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id z15sf2361825wrw.0
 ?d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com;
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com;
 ?spf=neutral (google.com: 83.223.99.6 is neither permitted nor denied 
by best
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
X-Google-Smtp-Source: 
APXvYqyKisHZvFWpohBRwPsvt40r94Ro4WY604SjLb9Rw2YE/6H94rxWLjbpM/T9vccnjBUH9ona4Q==
 ?d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com;
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
 ?spf=neutral (google.com: 83.223.99.6 is neither permitted nor denied 
by best
 ?by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n16si5340484wrp.218.2020.01.30.14.03.44
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 83.223.99.6 is neither permitted nor 
denied
X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;?????? spf=neutral
 ?(google.com: 83.223.99.6 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess 
record
X-Google-Group-Id: 631184299376


-- 
'ooroo

Stinga...(:)-)
---------------------------------------------------
Email: stinga at wolf-rock.com         o
You need only two tools.        o /////
A hammer and duct tape. If it    /@   `\  /) ~
doesn't move and it should use  >  (O)  X<  ~  Fish!!
the hammer. If it moves and      `\___/'  \) ~
shouldn't, use the tape.           \\\
---------------------------------------------------


From timhfl at yahoo.com  Sat Feb  1 12:57:21 2020
From: timhfl at yahoo.com (Tim H)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:57:21 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman on TMDHosting.com
In-Reply-To: <271551105.236080.1580579684758@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <cd3544eb-cea7-b645-c304-7521e82f3f54@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <c94c2e5a-e686-468a-8e87-886e62e1d94e@msapiro.net>
 <633f1ff6-05a2-d4ef-3dcf-82262c51f797@aresti.com>
 <3c951505-1a79-6739-b7ad-5c5cd309b594@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <967489867.526341.1580446983036@mail.yahoo.com>
 <d1c24b76-1785-7688-0e25-f2dde848d5d3@msapiro.net>
 <1676689145.24520.1580511063252@mail.yahoo.com>
 <c5b2dc2f-0869-6406-7d03-adeb0d19538a@msapiro.net>
 <271551105.236080.1580579684758@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1364222004.225011.1580579841645@mail.yahoo.com>

 

  Top posting my reply, hope this is OK.? Oddly, my host included a Terminal window! I have never seen that before. Attached are screen shots of some ls -l results.?
Mark are these normal for a mailman installation?
I think my host does not want to support Mailman. Maybe new accounts aren't getting it in cPanel but the program is still on my server to support legacy accounts that are still using it.?
And yes, I replied to Brian, with screen shots.?
Thanks!
Tim
    On Friday, January 31, 2020, 07:29:24 PM EST, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:  
 
 On 1/31/20 2:51 PM, Tim H wrote:
> On Friday, January 31, 2020, 12:43:39 PM EST, Mark Sapiro 
> <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
> 
> On 1/30/20 9:03 PM, Tim H via Mailman-Users wrote:
>? >? I just moved a cluster of domains to TMDHosting.com
>? > I had two Mailman mailing lists on the old service.? I made a gziped 
> tarball of the entire account using the usual tool. Staff at TMD brought 
> it over and in minutes all my files were in place.
>? > But. They do not have Mailman in cPanel.
> 
> 
> As far as I know, every cPanel installation has Mailman 2.1.
> 
> The issue may be that they just dropped your files into somewhere in
> /usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/mailman. You can't just do that. cPanel's
> Mailman is different enough that the config.pck files aren't directly
> compatible and the file names and or locations maybe different to.
> 
> See <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030641>.
> 
> I searched my entire file set for "mailman" and came up empty.

/usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/mailman is in the server's file system, but 
it is not somethin that users on a shared cPanel host have access to.

> I thought all cPanel installations came with Mailman.? Maybe something 
> happened and it isn't the case since some later version.

I doubt it, although I suppose it's possible that the host disabled it. 
But then, the fact that cPanel thinks your list address exist seems to 
say your list is at least partially there.

This is an issue that your hosting provider needs to resolve, but if 
they are like a lot of cPanel hosts, Mailman is only there because it 
comes with cPanel and they aren't interested in supporting it.

Brian is an exception. See his post at 
<https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2020-January/084961.html> 
and follow up with him.

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

From timhfl at yahoo.com  Sat Feb  1 12:58:00 2020
From: timhfl at yahoo.com (Tim H)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:58:00 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman on TMDHosting.com
In-Reply-To: <1263659178.38047.1580509764623@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <cd3544eb-cea7-b645-c304-7521e82f3f54@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <c94c2e5a-e686-468a-8e87-886e62e1d94e@msapiro.net>
 <633f1ff6-05a2-d4ef-3dcf-82262c51f797@aresti.com>
 <3c951505-1a79-6739-b7ad-5c5cd309b594@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <967489867.526341.1580446983036@mail.yahoo.com>
 <3e09bc10-c8e5-be26-974c-414a0f74c99a@emwd.com>
 <1263659178.38047.1580509764623@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1941399647.207874.1580579880423@mail.yahoo.com>

 On Friday, January 31, 2020, 01:45:36 PM EST, Brian Carpenter <brian_carpenter at emwd.com> wrote:
 
 
 On 1/31/20 12:03 AM, Tim H via Mailman-Users wrote:
>? I just moved a cluster of domains to TMDHosting.com
> I had two Mailman mailing lists on the old service.? I made a gziped tarball of the entire account using the usual tool. Staff at TMD brought it over and in minutes all my files were in place.
> But. They do not have Mailman in cPanel. They do not have Mailman available in Softalicious.? This is a shared hosting type of account.? I don't have root access to the server.
> Their suggestion was to create an email address the same as the mailing list address, then use that to set up BCC to a group of contacts in Roundcube.
> So I tried to create mymailinglist at mydomain.com
> I could not create the address. Instead I got an error message saying a mailing list with that address already exists.
> But the address does not show up in the list of email addresses in cPanel, so, I cannot delete it.
> I didn't think about the Mailman mailing lists when I set up to do the transfer.? I took the time to save the member lists and some of the archives, but I should have gone ahead and deleted the lists. I did not suspect that the new service would not have Mailman.? Every web service provider I've been with in years and years has had Mailman.
> So - what now?? Anyone on TMDHosting?? Have you been where I just landed?
> Thanks.
> Tim
> ------------------------------------------------------

Hi Tim,

Screenshots of what you are seeing would be helpful. Are you sure 
Mailman is not accessible via cPanel? They are under Mailing Lists in 
the Email section of cPanel. Mailing lists and email accounts are 
treated as separate services on a cPanel server. Also Mailman is not 
available via Softaculous.

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--

I am sure that?Mailman is not accessible via cPanel.? Screen shot attached.?
Thank you for confirming that Mailman is not available via Softalicious. That helps.?
I opened a support ticket with TMD. The 2 email addresses that were the SendTo addresses for the old Mailman lists were brought over in the transfer. They were invisible to me.? A senior tech deleted them, and created normal email addresses in their place. They recommend I use Roundcube and Contact Groups instead.? That's not a mailing list. If there were a function in Roundcube for "on receipt of new message, send to the Group Contact List", I'd be fine. Minimal but it would work.?
- Tim?


    

From timhfl at yahoo.com  Sat Feb  1 12:59:08 2020
From: timhfl at yahoo.com (Tim H)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 17:59:08 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Fw:  Mailman on TMDHosting.com
In-Reply-To: <1676689145.24520.1580511063252@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <cd3544eb-cea7-b645-c304-7521e82f3f54@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <c94c2e5a-e686-468a-8e87-886e62e1d94e@msapiro.net>
 <633f1ff6-05a2-d4ef-3dcf-82262c51f797@aresti.com>
 <3c951505-1a79-6739-b7ad-5c5cd309b594@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <967489867.526341.1580446983036@mail.yahoo.com>
 <d1c24b76-1785-7688-0e25-f2dde848d5d3@msapiro.net>
 <1676689145.24520.1580511063252@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42943057.234307.1580579948606@mail.yahoo.com>

 I just now realized my replies were not going to the list.? My bad!
   ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Tim H <timhfl at yahoo.com>To: Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020, 05:51:03 PM ESTSubject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman on TMDHosting.com
  On Friday, January 31, 2020, 12:43:39 PM EST, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
 
 On 1/30/20 9:03 PM, Tim H via Mailman-Users wrote:
>? I just moved a cluster of domains to TMDHosting.com
> I had two Mailman mailing lists on the old service.? I made a gziped tarball of the entire account using the usual tool. Staff at TMD brought it over and in minutes all my files were in place.
> But. They do not have Mailman in cPanel.


As far as I know, every cPanel installation has Mailman 2.1.

The issue may be that they just dropped your files into somewhere in 
/usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/mailman. You can't just do that. cPanel's 
Mailman is different enough that the config.pck files aren't directly 
compatible and the file names and or locations maybe different to.

See <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030641>.
I searched my entire file set for "mailman" and came up empty.?I don't have a path that looks like /usr/loca/cpanelI have /home/(myaccountID), with public_html, public_ftp,? and the usual folders.? I have Hidden Files turned on. I can see a number of folder with dot as the first character in the name (.cpanel, .qidb, .spamassassin, etc.)
I thought all cPanel installations came with Mailman.? Maybe something happened and it isn't the case since some later version.?
I have paper_lantern on cPanel Version 84.0 (build 21)
The service I came from had cPanel Version 70.0 (build 69)?
I will go look around on the cPanel docs site and see what I can see.?

Thanks,
Tim    

From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb  1 14:19:03 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 11:19:03 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] acceptable_aliases does not seem to work (or
 more likely I don't understand) V2.1.23
In-Reply-To: <dde9c11e-b668-e71d-99af-8da9bbb02f7a@wolf-rock.com>
References: <60a04924-5d22-3304-e679-a0f6bd046a25@wolf-rock.com>
 <1b39a85e-f70f-c298-b5af-4cc0bf63b5e9@msapiro.net>
 <dde9c11e-b668-e71d-99af-8da9bbb02f7a@wolf-rock.com>
Message-ID: <b617ddc0-08d7-5d0b-1b7a-df50e3658953@msapiro.net>

On 2/1/20 1:58 AM, stinga wrote:
> On 01/02/2020 02:26, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>
>> You can make use of the fact that mailman considers a post to be from 
>> a member if any of the From:, Reply-To: Sender: or envelope sender 
>> addresses is a list member. Posts from google groups generally have no 
>> Sender: header, and the envelope sender is something like 
>> 'info+bncbcn2p7unuujrbfxhspsakgqe7gew6fa at googlegroups.com' where the 
>> 'bncbcn2p7unuujrbfxhspsakgqe7gew6fa' may not be constant. However, 
>> messages from Google Groups have a
>>
>> Reply-To: groupname at googlegroups.com
> I don't have googlegroup in the email anywhere.
> And the Reply-To: is the original sender in my example: another at domain.com


In order to enable that Reply-To: you need to go to your group Settings 
-> Email options and set Post replies to "To the entire group". There 
are other options "To the owners of the group" and "To the managers of 
the group" which probably also generate fixed Reply-To: headers.

If you don't want to use one of those to create a fixed Reply-To: 
address that you can add to your list as a member with no mail, you'll 
have to live with the messages being held.

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

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Sat Feb  1 15:25:12 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 15:25:12 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Fw: Mailman on TMDHosting.com
In-Reply-To: <42943057.234307.1580579948606@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <cd3544eb-cea7-b645-c304-7521e82f3f54@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <c94c2e5a-e686-468a-8e87-886e62e1d94e@msapiro.net>
 <633f1ff6-05a2-d4ef-3dcf-82262c51f797@aresti.com>
 <3c951505-1a79-6739-b7ad-5c5cd309b594@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <967489867.526341.1580446983036@mail.yahoo.com>
 <d1c24b76-1785-7688-0e25-f2dde848d5d3@msapiro.net>
 <1676689145.24520.1580511063252@mail.yahoo.com>
 <42943057.234307.1580579948606@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b650fa58-5920-1d44-b488-ee263dda8286@emwd.com>

On 2/1/20 12:59 PM, Tim H via Mailman-Users wrote:
>   I just now realized my replies were not going to the list.? My bad!
>     ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Tim H <timhfl at yahoo.com>To: Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020, 05:51:03 PM ESTSubject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman on TMDHosting.com
>    On Friday, January 31, 2020, 12:43:39 PM EST, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
>   
>   On 1/30/20 9:03 PM, Tim H via Mailman-Users wrote:
>>  ? I just moved a cluster of domains to TMDHosting.com
>> I had two Mailman mailing lists on the old service.? I made a gziped tarball of the entire account using the usual tool. Staff at TMD brought it over and in minutes all my files were in place.
>> But. They do not have Mailman in cPanel.
>
> As far as I know, every cPanel installation has Mailman 2.1.
>
> The issue may be that they just dropped your files into somewhere in
> /usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/mailman. You can't just do that. cPanel's
> Mailman is different enough that the config.pck files aren't directly
> compatible and the file names and or locations maybe different to.
>
> See <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030641>.
> I searched my entire file set for "mailman" and came up empty.?I don't have a path that looks like /usr/loca/cpanelI have /home/(myaccountID), with public_html, public_ftp,? and the usual folders.? I have Hidden Files turned on. I can see a number of folder with dot as the first character in the name (.cpanel, .qidb, .spamassassin, etc.)
> I thought all cPanel installations came with Mailman.? Maybe something happened and it isn't the case since some later version.
> I have paper_lantern on cPanel Version 84.0 (build 21)
> The service I came from had cPanel Version 70.0 (build 69)
> I will go look around on the cPanel docs site and see what I can see.
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/brian_carpenter%40emwd.com

All cPanel servers come with Mailman preinstalled. However the host can 
disable their clients from accessing Mailman via WHM (Webhost Manager). 
So Mailman is there but you won't be able to use it unless your hosting 
chooses to enable it.

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/


From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb  1 16:15:26 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 13:15:26 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman on TMDHosting.com
In-Reply-To: <1364222004.225011.1580579841645@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <cd3544eb-cea7-b645-c304-7521e82f3f54@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <c94c2e5a-e686-468a-8e87-886e62e1d94e@msapiro.net>
 <633f1ff6-05a2-d4ef-3dcf-82262c51f797@aresti.com>
 <3c951505-1a79-6739-b7ad-5c5cd309b594@bmrb.wisc.edu>
 <967489867.526341.1580446983036@mail.yahoo.com>
 <d1c24b76-1785-7688-0e25-f2dde848d5d3@msapiro.net>
 <1676689145.24520.1580511063252@mail.yahoo.com>
 <c5b2dc2f-0869-6406-7d03-adeb0d19538a@msapiro.net>
 <271551105.236080.1580579684758@mail.yahoo.com>
 <1364222004.225011.1580579841645@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bb35ea78-56d9-b66d-bd84-3c9355b2f47d@msapiro.net>

On 2/1/20 9:54 AM, Tim H wrote:
 >
 > Top posting my reply, hope this is OK.  Oddly, my host included a
 > Terminal window! I have never seen that before.

And it appears from the # prompt in that window that you have root 
access to the server. This seems to say to me that the host doesn't have 
much of a clue at all about what they are doing.


 > Attached are screen
 > shots of some ls -l results.
 >
 > Mark are these normal for a mailman installation?

Your screenshots were removed by the list's content filtering, but I got 
them in off-list mail. The only interesting one is

# ls -l /usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/mailman

'x 2 mailman mailman  22 Nov 11 01:37 bin
'x 2 mailman mailman 170 Nov 11 01:37 cgi-bin
'x 2 mailman mailman  21 Nov 11 01:37 mail

Note, this would be much better just copied and pasted into your email 
rather than attached as a screenshot.

Yes, these are normal, but there is much more missing. If this were 
actually a working Mailman installation there would also be archives, 
cron, data, icons, lists, locks, logs, Mailman, messages, pythonlib, 
qfiles, scripts, spam and tests directories in addition to the bin, 
cgi-bin and mail directories that are there.

So basically, Mailman is not really installed in any functional way.

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

From stinga at wolf-rock.com  Sat Feb  1 22:07:13 2020
From: stinga at wolf-rock.com (stinga)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2020 11:07:13 +0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] acceptable_aliases does not seem to work (or
 more likely I don't understand) V2.1.23
In-Reply-To: <b617ddc0-08d7-5d0b-1b7a-df50e3658953@msapiro.net>
References: <60a04924-5d22-3304-e679-a0f6bd046a25@wolf-rock.com>
 <1b39a85e-f70f-c298-b5af-4cc0bf63b5e9@msapiro.net>
 <dde9c11e-b668-e71d-99af-8da9bbb02f7a@wolf-rock.com>
 <b617ddc0-08d7-5d0b-1b7a-df50e3658953@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <51cd98ac-aab7-4db6-c5cd-5eab25dc91cc@wolf-rock.com>

On 02/02/2020 03:19, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/1/20 1:58 AM, stinga wrote:
>> On 01/02/2020 02:26, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>>
>>> You can make use of the fact that mailman considers a post to be 
>>> from a member if any of the From:, Reply-To: Sender: or envelope 
>>> sender addresses is a list member. Posts from google groups 
>>> generally have no Sender: header, and the envelope sender is 
>>> something like 
>>> 'info+bncbcn2p7unuujrbfxhspsakgqe7gew6fa at googlegroups.com' where the 
>>> 'bncbcn2p7unuujrbfxhspsakgqe7gew6fa' may not be constant. However, 
>>> messages from Google Groups have a
>>>
>>> Reply-To: groupname at googlegroups.com
>> I don't have googlegroup in the email anywhere.
>> And the Reply-To: is the original sender in my example: 
>> another at domain.com
>
>
> In order to enable that Reply-To: you need to go to your group 
> Settings -> Email options and set Post replies to "To the entire 
> group". There are other options "To the owners of the group" and "To 
> the managers of the group" which probably also generate fixed 
> Reply-To: headers.
>
> If you don't want to use one of those to create a fixed Reply-To: 
> address that you can add to your list as a member with no mail, you'll 
> have to live with the messages being held.
Many thanks, I had discovered that and was waiting for a message to 
arrive to test!
I note that the email received from the email list was cc: to the 
original sender, but I am not sure if that is real or just a way to get 
the sender in the email header somewhere.

Tanks again, I believe the change to google group settings is the answer.

-- 
'ooroo

Stinga...(:)-)
---------------------------------------------------
Email: stinga at wolf-rock.com         o
You need only two tools.        o /////
A hammer and duct tape. If it    /@   `\  /) ~
doesn't move and it should use  >  (O)  X<  ~  Fish!!
the hammer. If it moves and      `\___/'  \) ~
shouldn't, use the tape.           \\\
---------------------------------------------------


From juergen.dollinger at ulm.ccc.de  Sun Feb  2 09:15:33 2020
From: juergen.dollinger at ulm.ccc.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen?= Dollinger)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2020 15:15:33 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] how to disable main mailman-request and mailman
 list without stopping mailman functionality
In-Reply-To: <b76fd079-791f-85e3-ebd5-33f0c7652740@msapiro.net>
References: <adc51e44-2239-ccd2-b55b-c2d39a10aa79@powercraft.nl>
 <e4c53a3e-2d94-62bd-920c-f46b165ab448@msapiro.net>
 <c2662b00-9cf5-1801-a84c-edfee900b226@powercraft.nl>
 <b76fd079-791f-85e3-ebd5-33f0c7652740@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <20200202141533.GE5621@magrathea.ulm.ccc.de>

Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Add the following lines to /etc/aliases
> 
> mailman-admin:       /dev/null
> mailman-bounces:     /dev/null

If you have mebership reminders active on other mailinglists this is a
problem because you dont get the bounces.

Additionally if the spammers use the web interface it does not help. I
had this problem: Somebody found it funny to try hundred times a day 
curl http://mydom.example.org/mailman/subscribe/mailman?email=victim at example.com 
I solved it by setting SUBSCRIBE_FORM_SECRET="some_ranmdom_string" in 
/etc/mailman/mm_cfg.py .

-- 
\ J. Dollinger FAW/n Ulm |zeitnot at irc| http://www.home.pages.de/~zeitnot/
 \    "What're quantum mechanics?"   --   "I don't know. People who    /
  \    repair quantums, I suppose."         (Terry Pratchett, Eric)   /

From kapildev.sharma at onsumaye.com  Mon Feb  3 08:43:09 2020
From: kapildev.sharma at onsumaye.com (Kapil Dev Sharma)
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 19:13:09 +0530
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
Message-ID: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Team,

We are using mailman 2.1.29. When sending the mail using Mailman, The email
body content is sent as an attachment (ATT00001.txt). We face this type of
issues only in outlook. Could you please suggest us the solution for the
same.

If you already address this issue in any upgraded version then share the
version name with us.

Thanks,
Kapil Dev Sharma


Thanks,
Kapil Dev Sharma
Tech Lead, OnSumaye

[image: image.png]
 https://www.onsumaye.com/

From cpz at tuunq.com  Mon Feb  3 14:35:48 2020
From: cpz at tuunq.com (Carl Zwanzig)
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 11:35:48 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7a2285ff-2805-9a01-2785-42a2539cebd8@tuunq.com>

On 2/3/2020 5:43 AM, Kapil Dev Sharma wrote:
> We are using mailman 2.1.29. When sending the mail using Mailman, The email
> body content is sent as an attachment (ATT00001.txt). We face this type of
> issues only in outlook. Could you please suggest us the solution for the
> same.

The best solution is to not use outlook. IIRC some versions don't construct 
the MIME containers properly, and there isn't much mailman can do about 
that. You might look at the message as sent by outlook in source form to see 
how that version encapsulates the body and then again after it's been 
through mailman.

z!

From luscheina at yahoo.de  Mon Feb  3 15:14:14 2020
From: luscheina at yahoo.de (Christian F Buser)
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 21:14:14 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200203211414009093.28ebb066@yahoo.de>

Hello Kapil Dev Sharma. On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 19:13:09 +0530, you wrote:

> We are using mailman 2.1.29. When sending the mail using Mailman, The email
> body content is sent as an attachment (ATT00001.txt). We face this type of
> issues only in outlook. Could you please suggest us the solution for the
> same.

Are you talking about Outlook on the sending side, or on the receiving side? 

Are you talking about Outlook, which is part of the Office package, or are you talking about "Outlook Express", which is a rather outdated and no longer supported application? 

Christian 

-- 
Christian F. Buser, Hohle Gasse 6, CH-5507 Mellingen (Switzerland)      
Hilfe fuer Strassenkinder in Ghana: https://www.chance-for-children.org

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb  3 16:26:05 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 13:26:05 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0487eb20-a7d7-dabb-e750-77c5ec417e60@msapiro.net>

On 2/3/20 5:43 AM, Kapil Dev Sharma wrote:
> Hi Team,
> 
> We are using mailman 2.1.29. When sending the mail using Mailman, The email
> body content is sent as an attachment (ATT00001.txt). We face this type of
> issues only in outlook. Could you please suggest us the solution for the
> same.


What does your list do to this mail. I.e. have you set from_is_list or 
dmarc_moderation_action to Wrap Message?

Actually, the most likely explanation is the list has set Non-digest 
options -> msg_header, and the incoming message (after content 
filtering) is other than a single text/plain part. This will cause the 
msg_header to be added as a separate MIME part preceding the rest of the 
message. If that is the reason, you may be able to adjust the list's 
content filtering using things like pass_mime_types, 
collapse_alternatives and convert_html_to_plaintext to ensure the 
filtered message is a single text/plain part.

However, if you want to allow HTML, and or attachments, you will need to 
ensure that Non-digest options -> msg_header is completely empty, or use 
a mail client that is better at displaying inline text in line.

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

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb  3 16:30:10 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 13:30:10 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] how to disable main mailman-request and mailman
 list without stopping mailman functionality
In-Reply-To: <20200202141533.GE5621@magrathea.ulm.ccc.de>
References: <adc51e44-2239-ccd2-b55b-c2d39a10aa79@powercraft.nl>
 <e4c53a3e-2d94-62bd-920c-f46b165ab448@msapiro.net>
 <c2662b00-9cf5-1801-a84c-edfee900b226@powercraft.nl>
 <b76fd079-791f-85e3-ebd5-33f0c7652740@msapiro.net>
 <20200202141533.GE5621@magrathea.ulm.ccc.de>
Message-ID: <ea8ff66e-e28e-c17f-e368-1aaf803cd2d0@msapiro.net>

On 2/2/20 6:15 AM, J?rgen Dollinger wrote:
> 
> Additionally if the spammers use the web interface it does not help. I
> had this problem: Somebody found it funny to try hundred times a day
> curl http://mydom.example.org/mailman/subscribe/mailman?email=victim at example.com
> I solved it by setting SUBSCRIBE_FORM_SECRET="some_ranmdom_string" in
> /etc/mailman/mm_cfg.py .


I'm glad SUBSCRIBE_FORM_SECRET worked in your case, but it doesn't 
always. See the thread at 
<https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users at mailman3.org/thread/47XWM3F6SXZQLVAGCOLC4KCOT32QSHEE/>.

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

From kapildev.sharma at onsumaye.com  Tue Feb 11 04:55:19 2020
From: kapildev.sharma at onsumaye.com (Kapil Dev Sharma)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:25:19 +0530
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <0487eb20-a7d7-dabb-e750-77c5ec417e60@msapiro.net>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0487eb20-a7d7-dabb-e750-77c5ec417e60@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

We allow users to send HTML or attachments and also we have msg_header
completed empty but mail also have an attachment like ATT00001.txt, It's
from mailman side or any other setting which we have to do. Please suggest!


Thanks,
Kapil Dev Sharma



On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:57 AM Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> On 2/3/20 5:43 AM, Kapil Dev Sharma wrote:
> > Hi Team,
> >
> > We are using mailman 2.1.29. When sending the mail using Mailman, The
> email
> > body content is sent as an attachment (ATT00001.txt). We face this type
> of
> > issues only in outlook. Could you please suggest us the solution for the
> > same.
>
>
> What does your list do to this mail. I.e. have you set from_is_list or
> dmarc_moderation_action to Wrap Message?
>
> Actually, the most likely explanation is the list has set Non-digest
> options -> msg_header, and the incoming message (after content
> filtering) is other than a single text/plain part. This will cause the
> msg_header to be added as a separate MIME part preceding the rest of the
> message. If that is the reason, you may be able to adjust the list's
> content filtering using things like pass_mime_types,
> collapse_alternatives and convert_html_to_plaintext to ensure the
> filtered message is a single text/plain part.
>
> However, if you want to allow HTML, and or attachments, you will need to
> ensure that Non-digest options -> msg_header is completely empty, or use
> a mail client that is better at displaying inline text in line.
>
> --
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/kapildev.sharma%40onsumaye.com
>

From johnson at Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU  Tue Feb 11 10:18:59 2020
From: johnson at Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU (Bruce  Johnson)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:18:59 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0487eb20-a7d7-dabb-e750-77c5ec417e60@msapiro.net>
 <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <26385850-73B6-4B28-9DD2-38283372E796@pharmacy.arizona.edu>

In my experience this is not a Mailman issue, per se, but an Exchange issue on the sender?s or recipient's end:

https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/2164722-outlook-exchange-email-attachments-coming-through-as-att


On Feb 11, 2020, at 2:55 AM, Kapil Dev Sharma <kapildev.sharma at onsumaye.com<mailto:kapildev.sharma at onsumaye.com>> wrote:

Hi,

We allow users to send HTML or attachments and also we have msg_header
completed empty but mail also have an attachment like ATT00001.txt, It's
from mailman side or any other setting which we have to do. Please suggest!


Thanks,
Kapil Dev Sharma



On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:57 AM Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net<mailto:mark at msapiro.net>> wrote:

On 2/3/20 5:43 AM, Kapil Dev Sharma wrote:
Hi Team,

We are using mailman 2.1.29. When sending the mail using Mailman, The
email
body content is sent as an attachment (ATT00001.txt). We face this type
of
issues only in outlook. Could you please suggest us the solution for the
same.


What does your list do to this mail. I.e. have you set from_is_list or
dmarc_moderation_action to Wrap Message?

Actually, the most likely explanation is the list has set Non-digest
options -> msg_header, and the incoming message (after content
filtering) is other than a single text/plain part. This will cause the
msg_header to be added as a separate MIME part preceding the rest of the
message. If that is the reason, you may be able to adjust the list's
content filtering using things like pass_mime_types,
collapse_alternatives and convert_html_to_plaintext to ensure the
filtered message is a single text/plain part.

However, if you want to allow HTML, and or attachments, you will need to
ensure that Non-digest options -> msg_header is completely empty, or use
a mail client that is better at displaying inline text in line.

--
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net<mailto:mark at msapiro.net>>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org<mailto:Mailman-Users at python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/kapildev.sharma%40onsumaye.com

------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org<mailto:Mailman-Users at python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/johnson%40pharmacy.arizona.edu

--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


From jw at witch.westfalen.de  Tue Feb 11 05:40:29 2020
From: jw at witch.westfalen.de (Jutta Wrage)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:40:29 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0487eb20-a7d7-dabb-e750-77c5ec417e60@msapiro.net>
 <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <23404E49-4A08-4F12-9B8E-D047798DF06E@witch.westfalen.de>


Am 11.02.2020 um 10:55 schrieb Kapil Dev Sharma:

> We allow users to send HTML or attachments and also we have msg_header
> completed empty but mail also have an attachment like ATT00001.txt, It's
> from mailman side or any other setting which we have to do. Please suggest!

My suggestion: The sender ist attaching the original mail he/she ist answering to.

I have been receiving such an attachment a time ago in a private answer to a mailing list post: It contained a message from the list or the digest index - I do not remember.
I guess the mail client was not able to handle digests. - Outlook, maybe.

Would be a good idea to examine the content of such an attachment.

Ah. just did find my message about that problem: Yes the problem ist produced by client software not being able to handle Digests.

The sender of the mailing list message changes from digest mode to message mode, the problem will vanish.

Jutta


-- 
http://www.witch.westfalen.de


From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb 11 12:19:57 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:19:57 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Attachment issue in Outlook
In-Reply-To: <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+1KtOb0f5Qmkj5Ej7aEoA0KyfPEQ__KtWyMJTqhcHPBqPFWvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0487eb20-a7d7-dabb-e750-77c5ec417e60@msapiro.net>
 <CA+1KtObzs+m2yb169_y_yrEb_hAUFnowCop9E3NqBxB0==BZGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <68ed2c8b-dd0d-7eab-b574-e62d6a6ba0de@msapiro.net>

On 2/11/20 1:55 AM, Kapil Dev Sharma wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We allow users to send HTML or attachments and also we have msg_header
> completed empty but mail also have an attachment like ATT00001.txt, It's
> from mailman side or any other setting which we have to do. Please suggest!


What is the content of the ATT00001.txt attachment? In your OP you said
it was the message body. If so, what is it that Outlook displays as the
message? And are you certain that msg_header is completely empty? Even
just a single blank space or new line will make a difference.

If this is an issue that can be addressed by Mailman list configuration,
we need to see the complete MIME structure of the message as sent from
the list. It would also be helpful to see what Outlook displays for
these messages.

Note that you can't post screen shot images to this list, but you can
send them off list to me, and if you don't want to post a complete, raw
message to the list, you can send that off list to me as well.

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

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Tue Feb 11 14:42:15 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:42:15 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>

I've been reading up on migrating to a new server but I'm not sure I am
reading the right instructions. It seems that copying the lists to the
new server is one thing but it appears that the end result means the
users will have to use a new list server. That is, if users were
emailing listname at oldserver.domain.com they will now have to email
listname at newserver.domain.com. That is not what I want. After migrating
to the new server I want users to still email
listname at oldserver.domain.com. I expect to simply rename the new server
to the old hostname and change its IP address. Can someone point me to
some documentation that does that type migration? TIA.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200211/69516af0/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb 11 15:51:18 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:51:18 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>

On 2/11/20 11:42 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> I've been reading up on migrating to a new server but I'm not sure I am
> reading the right instructions. It seems that copying the lists to the
> new server is one thing but it appears that the end result means the
> users will have to use a new list server. That is, if users were
> emailing listname at oldserver.domain.com they will now have to email
> listname at newserver.domain.com. That is not what I want. After migrating
> to the new server I want users to still email
> listname at oldserver.domain.com. I expect to simply rename the new server
> to the old hostname and change its IP address. Can someone point me to
> some documentation that does that type migration? TIA.


This is dead simple.

Have you seen <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030682>, in particular, the two
archived posts linked from the first paragraph.

In any case, there are details depending on things like whether you want
to upgrade/change configurations, but I will assume that this is just a
matter of replacing a server and not changing Mailman.

In that case, you just rsync almost all of Mailman to the new server.
What I did when I did this last December is:

> rsync -a --exclude /locks /var/lib/mailman/ root at new.example.com:/var/lib/mailman
> rsync -a --exclude *pid --exclude /locks /opt/mailman/mm/var/ root at new.example.com:/opt/mailman/mm/var

Depending on your installation, you may have only one directory for
$prefix and $var_prefix. You may also have stuff in /etc/mailman.

You also have to copy Mailman's crontab and the relevant web server and
mail server configuration.

You need to set TTL a day or so in advance on your DNS records that
point to the old IP to a very short time, 300 seconds maybe even less if
you can.

Then you stop the services on the old server, change DNS to point to the
dew IP, do the final rsyncs, and start the services on the new server,
and you're done.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200211/47c318cf/attachment.sig>

From heller at deepsoft.com  Tue Feb 11 15:50:50 2020
From: heller at deepsoft.com (Robert Heller)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:50:50 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net> 
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <20200211205050.F178826C0173@sharky3.deepsoft.com>

At Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:42:15 -0500 Dennis Putnam <dap1 at bellsouth.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Content-Language: en-US
> 
> I've been reading up on migrating to a new server but I'm not sure I am
> reading the right instructions. It seems that copying the lists to the
> new server is one thing but it appears that the end result means the
> users will have to use a new list server. That is, if users were
> emailing listname at oldserver.domain.com they will now have to email
> listname at newserver.domain.com. That is not what I want. After migrating
> to the new server I want users to still email
> listname at oldserver.domain.com. I expect to simply rename the new server
> to the old hostname and change its IP address. Can someone point me to
> some documentation that does that type migration? TIA.

You don't "name" (or rename) the server.  You update the DNS server to use the 
new server's IP address for the old hostname.  How you update the DNS server 
greatly depends on exactly what sort of access you have to the DNS server.

It also depends on what level of access you have to the server(s).  Are these 
VPSs? Physical server boxes?  Are you just swapping physical hardware?  If you 
are swapping *physical hardware*, then you could, once the files are copied 
and everything is working (eg you have tested things as newserver.domain.com), 
you could shutdown the original oldserver.domain.com, and then reconfigure 
newserver.domain.com's IP address to be what oldserver.domain.com was.  In 
that case, there is no need to mess with the DNS server. (You might need to 
mess with a DHCP server, depending on how IP addresses are set up.)

In order to point you in the right direction, you need to tell us more...

> 
> Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> iF0EARECAB0WIQTebsbo9TQsIuOkbg/9+JZipna1VAUCXkMDmAAKCRD9+JZipna1
> VGajAKDxxI26C50i0+eKII1m8vtNZeuBowCdEXAqTWrPLMx742cnqMIdBBfKYc4=
> =5/6h
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/heller%40deepsoft.com
> 
>                                                                     

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933 Cell: 413-658-7953
Deepwoods Software        -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
heller at deepsoft.com       -- Webhosting Services
                                        

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 12 08:58:59 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 08:58:59 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <20200211205050.F178826C0173@sharky3.deepsoft.com>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <20200211205050.F178826C0173@sharky3.deepsoft.com>
Message-ID: <395a6c10-539e-ca7b-12ab-09b6509afc1c@bellsouth.net>

Hi Robert,

Thanks for the reply. I have no access to DNS which is why the old
server needs to be shutdown and the new server renamed the same as the
old server and the IP address changed to match. I have root access to
the mailman server. I'll reply to Mark's message with more detail.

On 2/11/2020 3:50 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:42:15 -0500 Dennis Putnam <dap1 at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Content-Language: en-US
>>
>> I've been reading up on migrating to a new server but I'm not sure I am
>> reading the right instructions. It seems that copying the lists to the
>> new server is one thing but it appears that the end result means the
>> users will have to use a new list server. That is, if users were
>> emailing listname at oldserver.domain.com they will now have to email
>> listname at newserver.domain.com. That is not what I want. After migrating
>> to the new server I want users to still email
>> listname at oldserver.domain.com. I expect to simply rename the new server
>> to the old hostname and change its IP address. Can someone point me to
>> some documentation that does that type migration? TIA.
> You don't "name" (or rename) the server.  You update the DNS server to use the 
> new server's IP address for the old hostname.  How you update the DNS server 
> greatly depends on exactly what sort of access you have to the DNS server.
>
> It also depends on what level of access you have to the server(s).  Are these 
> VPSs? Physical server boxes?  Are you just swapping physical hardware?  If you 
> are swapping *physical hardware*, then you could, once the files are copied 
> and everything is working (eg you have tested things as newserver.domain.com), 
> you could shutdown the original oldserver.domain.com, and then reconfigure 
> newserver.domain.com's IP address to be what oldserver.domain.com was.  In 
> that case, there is no need to mess with the DNS server. (You might need to 
> mess with a DHCP server, depending on how IP addresses are set up.)
>
> In order to point you in the right direction, you need to tell us more...
>
>> Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> iF0EARECAB0WIQTebsbo9TQsIuOkbg/9+JZipna1VAUCXkMDmAAKCRD9+JZipna1
>> VGajAKDxxI26C50i0+eKII1m8vtNZeuBowCdEXAqTWrPLMx742cnqMIdBBfKYc4=
>> =5/6h
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
>> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
>> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
>> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/heller%40deepsoft.com
>>
>>                                                                     


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200212/aced7a6a/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 12 08:58:59 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 08:58:59 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <20200211205050.F178826C0173@sharky3.deepsoft.com>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <20200211205050.F178826C0173@sharky3.deepsoft.com>
Message-ID: <395a6c10-539e-ca7b-12ab-09b6509afc1c@bellsouth.net>

Hi Robert,

Thanks for the reply. I have no access to DNS which is why the old
server needs to be shutdown and the new server renamed the same as the
old server and the IP address changed to match. I have root access to
the mailman server. I'll reply to Mark's message with more detail.

On 2/11/2020 3:50 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:42:15 -0500 Dennis Putnam <dap1 at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Content-Language: en-US
>>
>> I've been reading up on migrating to a new server but I'm not sure I am
>> reading the right instructions. It seems that copying the lists to the
>> new server is one thing but it appears that the end result means the
>> users will have to use a new list server. That is, if users were
>> emailing listname at oldserver.domain.com they will now have to email
>> listname at newserver.domain.com. That is not what I want. After migrating
>> to the new server I want users to still email
>> listname at oldserver.domain.com. I expect to simply rename the new server
>> to the old hostname and change its IP address. Can someone point me to
>> some documentation that does that type migration? TIA.
> You don't "name" (or rename) the server.  You update the DNS server to use the 
> new server's IP address for the old hostname.  How you update the DNS server 
> greatly depends on exactly what sort of access you have to the DNS server.
>
> It also depends on what level of access you have to the server(s).  Are these 
> VPSs? Physical server boxes?  Are you just swapping physical hardware?  If you 
> are swapping *physical hardware*, then you could, once the files are copied 
> and everything is working (eg you have tested things as newserver.domain.com), 
> you could shutdown the original oldserver.domain.com, and then reconfigure 
> newserver.domain.com's IP address to be what oldserver.domain.com was.  In 
> that case, there is no need to mess with the DNS server. (You might need to 
> mess with a DHCP server, depending on how IP addresses are set up.)
>
> In order to point you in the right direction, you need to tell us more...
>
>> Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> iF0EARECAB0WIQTebsbo9TQsIuOkbg/9+JZipna1VAUCXkMDmAAKCRD9+JZipna1
>> VGajAKDxxI26C50i0+eKII1m8vtNZeuBowCdEXAqTWrPLMx742cnqMIdBBfKYc4=
>> =5/6h
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
>> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
>> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
>> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/heller%40deepsoft.com
>>
>>                                                                     


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200212/aced7a6a/attachment-0001.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 12 09:06:05 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 09:06:05 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

Those are the ones I have been reading. I guess what I need to do is a
little more complicated than I posted. The old server is running v 2.1
and we are running into DEMARC issues. Since we need to upgrade anyway
we have upgraded a new server to the latest RHEL version and mailman
3.3. Once we migrate the lists to the new server we just want the users
to message the same email addresses as before which is why I questioned
those instructions. Since we don't have access to change DNS it seems
the easiest thing to do is change their hostnames and IP addresses. If
there is a better way I am interested.

On 2/11/2020 3:51 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/11/20 11:42 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> I've been reading up on migrating to a new server but I'm not sure I am
>> reading the right instructions. It seems that copying the lists to the
>> new server is one thing but it appears that the end result means the
>> users will have to use a new list server. That is, if users were
>> emailing listname at oldserver.domain.com they will now have to email
>> listname at newserver.domain.com. That is not what I want. After migrating
>> to the new server I want users to still email
>> listname at oldserver.domain.com. I expect to simply rename the new server
>> to the old hostname and change its IP address. Can someone point me to
>> some documentation that does that type migration? TIA.
>
> This is dead simple.
>
> Have you seen <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030682>, in particular, the two
> archived posts linked from the first paragraph.
>
> In any case, there are details depending on things like whether you want
> to upgrade/change configurations, but I will assume that this is just a
> matter of replacing a server and not changing Mailman.
>
> In that case, you just rsync almost all of Mailman to the new server.
> What I did when I did this last December is:
>
>> rsync -a --exclude /locks /var/lib/mailman/ root at new.example.com:/var/lib/mailman
>> rsync -a --exclude *pid --exclude /locks /opt/mailman/mm/var/ root at new.example.com:/opt/mailman/mm/var
> Depending on your installation, you may have only one directory for
> $prefix and $var_prefix. You may also have stuff in /etc/mailman.
>
> You also have to copy Mailman's crontab and the relevant web server and
> mail server configuration.
>
> You need to set TTL a day or so in advance on your DNS records that
> point to the old IP to a very short time, 300 seconds maybe even less if
> you can.
>
> Then you stop the services on the old server, change DNS to point to the
> dew IP, do the final rsyncs, and start the services on the new server,
> and you're done.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200212/576bfc5b/attachment-0001.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 12 11:42:56 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 08:42:56 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>

On 2/12/20 6:06 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Those are the ones I have been reading. I guess what I need to do is a
> little more complicated than I posted. The old server is running v 2.1
> and we are running into DEMARC issues. Since we need to upgrade anyway
> we have upgraded a new server to the latest RHEL version and mailman
> 3.3. Once we migrate the lists to the new server we just want the users
> to message the same email addresses as before which is why I questioned
> those instructions. Since we don't have access to change DNS it seems
> the easiest thing to do is change their hostnames and IP addresses. If
> there is a better way I am interested.


All the instructions/advice for moving lists are about moving from one
Mailman 2.1 installation to another. Migrating lists from Mailman 2.1 to
Mailman 3 is totally different. For that, you need a working Mailman 3
installation. You migrate Mailman 2.1 lists roughly as follows:

Create the Mailman 3 list with `mailman create`
Import the Mailman 2.1 config.pck with `mailman import21`
Import the Mailman 2.1 archives/private/xxx.mbox/zzz.mbox mailbox with
the Django Admin hyperkitty_import command.

I'm a bit confused about the rest of what you want to do. First, I don't
know what your DMARC issues might be with your current lists, but if
your Mailman 2.1 installation is relatively recent, there is essentially
no difference in DMARC mitigations between that and Mailman 3.3.

Then, your OP said you wanted users to be able to mail to the list at
listname at oldserver.domain.com. If you don't control DNS, you apparently
can't make the MX for oldserver.domain.com point to the new server, so
the only way to accomplish this would be to maintain the old server and
create aliases there (or change the existing Mailman aliases) to send
all the mail to listname(-*)@oldserver.domain.com to the corresponding
listname(-*)@newserver.domain.com address and also make
listname at oldserver.domain.com an acceptable alias of
thelistname at newserver.domain.com list.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200212/939d4fa9/attachment.sig>

From cpz at tuunq.com  Wed Feb 12 11:44:46 2020
From: cpz at tuunq.com (Carl Zwanzig)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 08:44:46 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <92ee8d54-60db-176d-9835-bc4a53b355b7@tuunq.com>

On 2/12/2020 6:06 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Since we don't have access to change DNS it seems
> the easiest thing to do is change their hostnames and IP addresses. If
> there is a better way I am interested.

It's not a better-or-worse choice, it's the _only_ choice. If the users are 
sending to the server at asdf.domain.tld, you have to make the server answer 
to that IP (which means the name resolves to the IP and the server answers 
the connection).

Later,

z!

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 12 12:06:40 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 12:06:40 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

We finally got the networking folks to cooperate so DNS is the way we
will go. I don't know if it makes any difference but the version was a
typo, we are at 2.0.x.

Please see embedded comments.

On 2/12/2020 11:42 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/12/20 6:06 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Those are the ones I have been reading. I guess what I need to do is a
>> little more complicated than I posted. The old server is running v 2.1
>> and we are running into DEMARC issues. Since we need to upgrade anyway
>> we have upgraded a new server to the latest RHEL version and mailman
>> 3.3. Once we migrate the lists to the new server we just want the users
>> to message the same email addresses as before which is why I questioned
>> those instructions. Since we don't have access to change DNS it seems
>> the easiest thing to do is change their hostnames and IP addresses. If
>> there is a better way I am interested.
>
> All the instructions/advice for moving lists are about moving from one
> Mailman 2.1 installation to another. Migrating lists from Mailman 2.1 to
> Mailman 3 is totally different. For that, you need a working Mailman 3
> installation. You migrate Mailman 2.1 lists roughly as follows:
>
> Create the Mailman 3 list with `mailman create`
No problem there.
> Import the Mailman 2.1 config.pck with `mailman import21`
Easy enough assuming I copy config.pck to the new server to run the command.
> Import the Mailman 2.1 archives/private/xxx.mbox/zzz.mbox mailbox with
> the Django Admin hyperkitty_import command.
I'm not familiar with that. I am guessing, similar to config.pck, I copy
that directory to the new server then run that command on that
directory. I'll have to install Django.
>
> I'm a bit confused about the rest of what you want to do. First, I don't
> know what your DMARC issues might be with your current lists, but if
> your Mailman 2.1 installation is relatively recent, there is essentially
> no difference in DMARC mitigations between that and Mailman 3.3.
>
> Then, your OP said you wanted users to be able to mail to the list at
> listname at oldserver.domain.com. If you don't control DNS, you apparently
> can't make the MX for oldserver.domain.com point to the new server, so
> the only way to accomplish this would be to maintain the old server and
> create aliases there (or change the existing Mailman aliases) to send
> all the mail to listname(-*)@oldserver.domain.com to the corresponding
> listname(-*)@newserver.domain.com address and also make
> listname at oldserver.domain.com an acceptable alias of
> thelistname at newserver.domain.com list.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200212/b8eb0b0a/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 12 12:51:35 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 09:51:35 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>

On 2/12/20 9:06 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> We finally got the networking folks to cooperate so DNS is the way we
> will go. I don't know if it makes any difference but the version was a
> typo, we are at 2.0.x.

If you really mean your current Mailman is 2.0.x, trying to import to MM
3 with `mailman import21` will likely result in a mess. See the
UPGRADING FROM 2.0.x to 2.1 section at
<https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/view/head:/UPGRADING>

> Please see embedded comments.
> 
>> Import the Mailman 2.1 config.pck with `mailman import21`
> Easy enough assuming I copy config.pck to the new server to run the command.

Yes.


>> Import the Mailman 2.1 archives/private/xxx.mbox/zzz.mbox mailbox with
>> the Django Admin hyperkitty_import command.
> I'm not familiar with that. I am guessing, similar to config.pck, I copy
> that directory to the new server then run that command on that
> directory. I'll have to install Django.


The Mailman 2.1 archives/private/xxx.mbox/zzz.mbox mailbox is a file,
not a directory. It is the cumulative mailbox containing all the 'zzz'
list's archived messages.

A complete Mailman 3 installation will include Postorius and HyperKitty
and Django to support them. Postorius is the web management UI for
Mailman. HyperKitty is the archiver. If you don't have that installed,
there's nothing to import the archives to.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200212/f9842381/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 13 06:17:13 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 06:17:13 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

I've been thrown into this so I am unfamiliar with these servers (not my
own that I usually deal with). Anyway, as I unravel things I'm working
with, I see that I am really running version 2.1.9. As I understand it,
the DMARC mitigation was not added until 2.1.18. So I think using
import21 should work, right?

On 2/12/2020 12:51 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/12/20 9:06 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> We finally got the networking folks to cooperate so DNS is the way we
>> will go. I don't know if it makes any difference but the version was a
>> typo, we are at 2.0.x.
> If you really mean your current Mailman is 2.0.x, trying to import to MM
> 3 with `mailman import21` will likely result in a mess. See the
> UPGRADING FROM 2.0.x to 2.1 section at
> <https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/view/head:/UPGRADING>
>
>> Please see embedded comments.
>>
>>> Import the Mailman 2.1 config.pck with `mailman import21`
>> Easy enough assuming I copy config.pck to the new server to run the command.
> Yes.
>
>
>>> Import the Mailman 2.1 archives/private/xxx.mbox/zzz.mbox mailbox with
>>> the Django Admin hyperkitty_import command.
>> I'm not familiar with that. I am guessing, similar to config.pck, I copy
>> that directory to the new server then run that command on that
>> directory. I'll have to install Django.
>
> The Mailman 2.1 archives/private/xxx.mbox/zzz.mbox mailbox is a file,
> not a directory. It is the cumulative mailbox containing all the 'zzz'
> list's archived messages.
>
> A complete Mailman 3 installation will include Postorius and HyperKitty
> and Django to support them. Postorius is the web management UI for
> Mailman. HyperKitty is the archiver. If you don't have that installed,
> there's nothing to import the archives to.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/e10e0b93/attachment-0001.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 13 11:14:36 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 08:14:36 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>

On 2/13/20 3:17 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> I've been thrown into this so I am unfamiliar with these servers (not my
> own that I usually deal with). Anyway, as I unravel things I'm working
> with, I see that I am really running version 2.1.9. As I understand it,
> the DMARC mitigation was not added until 2.1.18. So I think using
> import21 should work, right?


Yes, import21 will work with a 2.1.9 config.pck. And yes, there are no
DMARC mitigations in that version.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/8fc55c32/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 13 11:40:42 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 11:40:42 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

I'm stuck on the 2nd step.

I did:

mailman create rushtalk at csdco.com

Got no errors.

I'm on the new server, copied the pickle file from the old server to the
current directory and used the command:

mailman import21 rushtalk at csdco.com config.pck

I get: Error: No such list: rushtalk at csdco.com

Apparently I don't know what to use for the LISTSPEC. The specified
address is how we send messages to the list. I also tried the FQDN and
got the same error.

On 2/13/2020 11:14 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/13/20 3:17 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> I've been thrown into this so I am unfamiliar with these servers (not my
>> own that I usually deal with). Anyway, as I unravel things I'm working
>> with, I see that I am really running version 2.1.9. As I understand it,
>> the DMARC mitigation was not added until 2.1.18. So I think using
>> import21 should work, right?
>
> Yes, import21 will work with a 2.1.9 config.pck. And yes, there are no
> DMARC mitigations in that version.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/f21bd1d9/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 13 12:09:37 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 09:09:37 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>

On 2/13/20 8:40 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> I'm stuck on the 2nd step.
> 
> I did:
> 
> mailman create rushtalk at csdco.com
> 
> Got no errors.

Good.
> 
> I'm on the new server, copied the pickle file from the old server to the
> current directory and used the command:
> 
> mailman import21 rushtalk at csdco.com config.pck
> 
> I get: Error: No such list: rushtalk at csdco.com
> 
> Apparently I don't know what to use for the LISTSPEC. The specified
> address is how we send messages to the list. I also tried the FQDN and
> got the same error.


It should work with either rushtalk at csdco.com or rushtalk.csdco.com. Are
you sure you didn't spell it differently on the create? What does

mailman lists

give?

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/b9e6e788/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 13 14:19:42 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 14:19:42 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <114104ac-7f4f-7e91-c2d3-11233973b36e@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

For some reason the first 'create' didn't work even though it said
successful. The 2nd on did and the import worked.

On 2/13/2020 12:09 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/13/20 8:40 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> I'm stuck on the 2nd step.
>>
>> I did:
>>
>> mailman create rushtalk at csdco.com
>>
>> Got no errors.
> Good.
>> I'm on the new server, copied the pickle file from the old server to the
>> current directory and used the command:
>>
>> mailman import21 rushtalk at csdco.com config.pck
>>
>> I get: Error: No such list: rushtalk at csdco.com
>>
>> Apparently I don't know what to use for the LISTSPEC. The specified
>> address is how we send messages to the list. I also tried the FQDN and
>> got the same error.
>
> It should work with either rushtalk at csdco.com or rushtalk.csdco.com. Are
> you sure you didn't spell it differently on the create? What does
>
> mailman lists
>
> give?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/d3c8f7ab/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 13 14:36:10 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 14:36:10 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

Sorry for being a PITA but I can't find manage.py. Indeed I can't find
any mailman files other than in /opt/mailman which has no /bin.
Apparently version 3 uses different directories than what I've been
using (/usr/lib/Mailman and /var/lib/mailman).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/f4708e92/attachment.sig>

From johnson at Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU  Thu Feb 13 15:34:00 2020
From: johnson at Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU (Bruce  Johnson)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:34:00 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Upgrading Mailman from Centos package...
Message-ID: <EA9FA5B6-DFBF-457F-9F2D-C5E28BC33433@pharmacy.arizona.edu>

Probably a dumb question, but, this should also be the process to update MM from a RHEL/CentOS package to a later version from source?

https://wiki.list.org/DOC/4.80%20How%20do%20I%20upgrade%20from%20Mailman%202.1.x%20to%20a%20later%20Mailman%202.1.y%3F

I've checked this:

https://wiki.list.org/DOC/RHEL%20file%20changes%20after%20version%202.1.5-20

-- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 13 15:40:42 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:40:42 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>

On 2/13/20 11:36 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Sorry for being a PITA but I can't find manage.py. Indeed I can't find
> any mailman files other than in /opt/mailman which has no /bin.
> Apparently version 3 uses different directories than what I've been
> using (/usr/lib/Mailman and /var/lib/mailman).


It's probably not called manage.py in your installation. In a 'default'
Django install, manage.py is the name of the Django administratitve
command. In your case, it could be called django-admin or something else
depending on how Postorius/HyperKitty were installed.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200213/d4c355dd/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 13 16:10:34 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:10:34 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Upgrading Mailman from Centos package...
In-Reply-To: <EA9FA5B6-DFBF-457F-9F2D-C5E28BC33433@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
References: <EA9FA5B6-DFBF-457F-9F2D-C5E28BC33433@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Message-ID: <95f311ee-c617-fe25-7d6c-7fe0dec27ce3@msapiro.net>

On 2/13/20 12:34 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> Probably a dumb question, but, this should also be the process to update MM from a RHEL/CentOS package to a later version from source?
> 
> https://wiki.list.org/DOC/4.80%20How%20do%20I%20upgrade%20from%20Mailman%202.1.x%20to%20a%20later%20Mailman%202.1.y%3F
> 
> I've checked this:
> 
> https://wiki.list.org/DOC/RHEL%20file%20changes%20after%20version%202.1.5-20

Have you also seen which is linked from that?

You basically want to unpack the source tarball or retrieve the latest
source from Launchpad, configure it with --prefix=/usr/lib/mailman, and
'make' but not 'make install', and then update everything that's in
/usr/lib/mailman from the resulting Mailman/, build/bin, build/cron,
messages/, scripts and templates/.

You don't need to be concerned about /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin,
/usr/lib/mailman/mail or /usr/lib/mailman/tests.

I think that will work, but I've never done it so no guarantees.

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

From johnson at Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU  Thu Feb 13 16:53:12 2020
From: johnson at Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU (Bruce  Johnson)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 21:53:12 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Upgrading Mailman from Centos package...
In-Reply-To: <95f311ee-c617-fe25-7d6c-7fe0dec27ce3@msapiro.net>
References: <EA9FA5B6-DFBF-457F-9F2D-C5E28BC33433@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
 <95f311ee-c617-fe25-7d6c-7fe0dec27ce3@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <DD825EEF-27B3-4F6C-9520-658D7328FE2D@pharmacy.arizona.edu>



On Feb 13, 2020, at 2:10 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net<mailto:mark at msapiro.net>> wrote:

On 2/13/20 12:34 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
Probably a dumb question, but, this should also be the process to update MM from a RHEL/CentOS package to a later version from source?

https://wiki.list.org/DOC/4.80%20How%20do%20I%20upgrade%20from%20Mailman%202.1.x%20to%20a%20later%20Mailman%202.1.y%3F

I've checked this:

https://wiki.list.org/DOC/RHEL%20file%20changes%20after%20version%202.1.5-20

Have you also seen which is linked from that?


Yes I did, and based on everything I looked at in our system it looks like it?s supposed to.

The one thing I was worried about was the line " You can find the ./configure line you used last time by looking in the config.status file in old source tree."

Since I don?t have an old source tree, I was a little worried that there would be some weird bits in the config.

You basically want to unpack the source tarball or retrieve the latest
source from Launchpad, configure it with --prefix=/usr/lib/mailman, and
'make' but not 'make install', and then update everything that's in
/usr/lib/mailman from the resulting Mailman/, build/bin, build/cron,
messages/, scripts and templates/.

You don't need to be concerned about /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin,
/usr/lib/mailman/mail or /usr/lib/mailman/tests.

I think that will work, but I've never done it so no guarantees.

Fortunately it?s a VM so I can just snapshot it and if the upgrade breaks, just roll it back.

Thanks!

--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Fri Feb 14 10:09:08 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 10:09:08 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
 <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <55b3c4fd-2bc9-41dc-d2d2-f27e729e4e55@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

Just a little confusing with respect to the documentation which says:

python manage.py hyperkitty_import -l foo-list at example.com $var_prefix/archives/private/foo-list.mbox/foo-list.mbo


So the documentation should say for some installations:

django-admin hyperkitty_import -l foo-list at example.com $var_prefix/archives/private/foo-list.mbox/foo-list.mbox

Is that right?

On 2/13/2020 3:40 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/13/20 11:36 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Sorry for being a PITA but I can't find manage.py. Indeed I can't find
>> any mailman files other than in /opt/mailman which has no /bin.
>> Apparently version 3 uses different directories than what I've been
>> using (/usr/lib/Mailman and /var/lib/mailman).
>
> It's probably not called manage.py in your installation. In a 'default'
> Django install, manage.py is the name of the Django administratitve
> command. In your case, it could be called django-admin or something else
> depending on how Postorius/HyperKitty were installed.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/42c4caeb/attachment-0001.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Fri Feb 14 10:49:35 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 10:49:35 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
 <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <3b87705d-cc09-ae05-db97-285e71483da4@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

Another issue with these servers. The admin says 'pip3' was used to
install mailman. I thought 'pip' was a python installer. Unfortunately I
cannot find where it put the stuff. So the documentation that specifies
$prefix is of no use since I don't know what that is. This is RHEL so
does anyone know where things wind up? Specifically I'm looking for all
the icons to copy to my httpd directory. TIA

On 2/13/2020 3:40 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/13/20 11:36 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Sorry for being a PITA but I can't find manage.py. Indeed I can't find
>> any mailman files other than in /opt/mailman which has no /bin.
>> Apparently version 3 uses different directories than what I've been
>> using (/usr/lib/Mailman and /var/lib/mailman).
> It's probably not called manage.py in your installation. In a 'default'
> Django install, manage.py is the name of the Django administratitve
> command. In your case, it could be called django-admin or something else
> depending on how Postorius/HyperKitty were installed.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/25f7a29d/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 14 11:37:51 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 08:37:51 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <55b3c4fd-2bc9-41dc-d2d2-f27e729e4e55@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
 <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
 <55b3c4fd-2bc9-41dc-d2d2-f27e729e4e55@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <fb531081-78b3-3c40-d49f-c576c10abc6b@msapiro.net>

On 2/14/20 7:09 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Just a little confusing with respect to the documentation which says:
> 
> python manage.py hyperkitty_import -l foo-list at example.com $var_prefix/archives/private/foo-list.mbox/foo-list.mbo
> 
> 
> So the documentation should say for some installations:
> 
> django-admin hyperkitty_import -l foo-list at example.com $var_prefix/archives/private/foo-list.mbox/foo-list.mbox
> 
> Is that right?


It is correct that in some installations the command to invoke Django
may be django-admin. Whether our documentation should cover every
possible packaging decision made by a packager or installer is a
separate issue. My opinion is the people who do this
packaging/installation should provide supplemental documentation where
appropriate.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/73251709/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 14 12:09:52 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:09:52 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <3b87705d-cc09-ae05-db97-285e71483da4@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
 <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
 <3b87705d-cc09-ae05-db97-285e71483da4@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <0f119f84-4993-8426-1246-eb71d285464f@msapiro.net>

On 2/14/20 7:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Another issue with these servers. The admin says 'pip3' was used to
> install mailman. I thought 'pip' was a python installer.


Some distros call pip for Python 3 pip3.

> Unfortunately I
> cannot find where it put the stuff. So the documentation that specifies
> $prefix is of no use since I don't know what that is. This is RHEL so
> does anyone know where things wind up? Specifically I'm looking for all
> the icons to copy to my httpd directory. TIA


And neither can I. I know nothing about any Mailman 3 packages for RHEL
nor do I know what decisions the packager/installer made. You can find
information about Mailman core with

mailman info --verbose

This will tell you about Mailman Core, but not Django (Hyperkitty and
Postorius). For those, if you look at the django-admin command, it will
probably set PYTHONPATH and DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE. The name of the
DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE with a .py extension added is a file in
PYTHONPATH which contains the base settings for Hyperkitty and Postorius
and it probably also imports a local settings module (.py file) that
contains local overrides.

If Mailman was installed in a virtualenv, most software things will be
in that virtualenv in places like bin/ and lib/python.x.y/site-packages

What documentation are you looking at? Nothing I know of for Mailman 3
mentions $prefix or icons to be copied to your web server.

I am very confused over what you are trying to do. On the one hand, you
appear to be migrating lists to a server with Mailman 3 already
installed, and on the other you are asking about things that only an
installer should be concerned with

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/5d396031/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Fri Feb 14 12:11:59 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 12:11:59 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <fb531081-78b3-3c40-d49f-c576c10abc6b@msapiro.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
 <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
 <55b3c4fd-2bc9-41dc-d2d2-f27e729e4e55@bellsouth.net>
 <fb531081-78b3-3c40-d49f-c576c10abc6b@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <756cf80c-b047-f6fb-8696-f9afa9d13e88@bellsouth.net>

Hi Mark,

I guess there needs to be a caveat in the documentation indicating
different distros will need different commands. This project is turning
into a nightmare since I know nothing about django and they way mailman
3 is installed is radically different. Hyperkitty was installed but when
I run the command it fails.

# django-admin hyperkitty_import -l rushtalk at csdco.com rushtalk.mbox
No Django settings specified.
Unknown command: 'hyperkitty_import'
Type 'django-admin help' for usage.

The last line being of no use.

I'm also struggling with the web UI which is what prompted my other
email about where the icons are stored. It almost seems like the web UI
is just a radically different and does not use Apache in the same way
any more.

On 2/14/2020 11:37 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/14/20 7:09 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Just a little confusing with respect to the documentation which says:
>>
>> python manage.py hyperkitty_import -l foo-list at example.com $var_prefix/archives/private/foo-list.mbox/foo-list.mbo
>>
>>
>> So the documentation should say for some installations:
>>
>> django-admin hyperkitty_import -l foo-list at example.com $var_prefix/archives/private/foo-list.mbox/foo-list.mbox
>>
>> Is that right?
>
> It is correct that in some installations the command to invoke Django
> may be django-admin. Whether our documentation should cover every
> possible packaging decision made by a packager or installer is a
> separate issue. My opinion is the people who do this
> packaging/installation should provide supplemental documentation where
> appropriate.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dap1%40bellsouth.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/1214e319/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 14 12:28:08 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:28:08 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Migration
In-Reply-To: <756cf80c-b047-f6fb-8696-f9afa9d13e88@bellsouth.net>
References: <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <4bc5ce7e-0183-5fe4-ff32-6b4b8a63a127@bellsouth.net>
 <1d4d16ba-5ac4-74ad-4413-46281e233987@msapiro.net>
 <2fb6a3fe-bfcb-5f51-6360-ed634a5fe482@bellsouth.net>
 <21e921fb-5109-f7a1-af4e-4a450ff42f4d@msapiro.net>
 <8c60ee4f-1b16-57cb-a8d5-44278de26c5e@bellsouth.net>
 <e51367eb-6b5b-9354-6956-d540c82ed673@msapiro.net>
 <67b2a007-8a44-cfe1-87b9-b374f648714e@bellsouth.net>
 <7f2e07b8-64d5-e8b9-b252-04856834ce23@msapiro.net>
 <d3bc7f04-361b-2d2e-8c41-6891fbdf1f5a@bellsouth.net>
 <bd439ea1-38f1-972b-0065-84054b48d115@msapiro.net>
 <04971b85-02d1-57c3-d84b-1c8f1bfecba7@bellsouth.net>
 <e7e3f0e5-58ab-5d93-4859-b759f2825f6e@msapiro.net>
 <55b3c4fd-2bc9-41dc-d2d2-f27e729e4e55@bellsouth.net>
 <fb531081-78b3-3c40-d49f-c576c10abc6b@msapiro.net>
 <756cf80c-b047-f6fb-8696-f9afa9d13e88@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <8b2587a7-6498-085a-8092-b04fa4f10a11@msapiro.net>

On 2/14/20 9:11 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> I guess there needs to be a caveat in the documentation indicating
> different distros will need different commands. This project is turning
> into a nightmare since I know nothing about django and they way mailman
> 3 is installed is radically different. Hyperkitty was installed but when
> I run the command it fails.
> 
> # django-admin hyperkitty_import -l rushtalk at csdco.com rushtalk.mbox
> No Django settings specified.
> Unknown command: 'hyperkitty_import'
> Type 'django-admin help' for usage.


The django-admin command you are running does not specify PYTHONPATH and
DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE. I use a wrapper command like:

#!/bin/bash
. /opt/mailman/mm/venv/bin/activate
cd /opt/mailman/mm
export PYTHONPATH=/opt/mailman/mm
export DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE=settings
django-admin $@

to activate the virtualenv that Mailman is installed in, set things for
the environment and invoke the actual django-admin command. There may
not be a virtualenv in your case, and you don't know the appropriate
values for PYTHONPATH and DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE.

We don't know these answers. You need to be talking with the people who
installed Mailman on the server.


> I'm also struggling with the web UI which is what prompted my other
> email about where the icons are stored. It almost seems like the web UI
> is just a radically different and does not use Apache in the same way
> any more.


That is true. It is a Django 'project' Django is a wsgi application
which may run under mod_wsgi in Apache or a wsgi server like uwsgi or
gunicorn that is proxied to from apache.

Very little of the detail you know about Mailman 2.1 is relevant to
Mailman 3, particularly where the web server is concerned.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/7f6e4296/attachment-0001.sig>

From jw at witch.westfalen.de  Fri Feb 14 14:26:55 2020
From: jw at witch.westfalen.de (Jutta Wrage)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 20:26:55 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] genalises - no aliases for one od the ists
Message-ID: <28EB3EA8-7CA1-46AE-8129-0DADD09BE9AF@witch.westfalen.de>

Hello!

We are using Mailman 2.1.26

Now I discovered a problem:

genaliases creates 2 files and in one of them there is one mailing lists missing.

aliases has 11 lists
virtual-mailman has 10 lists

Is it possible to debug this somehow?
Exim does not accept mail for the missing list: 550 Unrouteable address

/usr/bin/python points to Python 2.7.17

I could add the missing lines in virtual-mailman manually, but once genaliases is run again the additional entries will be up and away again.

Any suggestions?

Jutta



From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 14 14:37:05 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 11:37:05 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] genalises - no aliases for one od the ists
In-Reply-To: <28EB3EA8-7CA1-46AE-8129-0DADD09BE9AF@witch.westfalen.de>
References: <28EB3EA8-7CA1-46AE-8129-0DADD09BE9AF@witch.westfalen.de>
Message-ID: <0f40fe0e-968c-1a45-8d33-df447563f93f@msapiro.net>

On 2/14/20 11:26 AM, Jutta Wrage wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> We are using Mailman 2.1.26
> 
> Now I discovered a problem:
> 
> genaliases creates 2 files and in one of them there is one mailing lists missing.
> 
> aliases has 11 lists
> virtual-mailman has 10 lists

The list is not in virtual-mailman because the the list's host_name is
not in POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS. If the host_name is not correct,
which seems likely, you can change it in the list admin General Options
page (in the Additional settings section near the bottom). If it is
correct you will need to add it to the POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS
list in mm_cfg.py.


> Exim does not accept mail for the missing list: 550 Unrouteable address


If you are using Exim, it is probably better to configure Exim as
discussed at <https://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html> rather than
using aliases and virtual mappings.

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

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Fri Feb 14 15:44:27 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 15:44:27 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>

Since migrating to mailman 3 on the latest RHEL is going to take some
time, I need an interim solution to DMARC mitigation. I understand
version 2.1.18 will do what I need, at least until I can finish the
migration. However, I have been unable to find a repository or rpm for
that version for RHEL 5. Can someone help me out with that?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/d61a1a50/attachment.sig>

From jw at witch.westfalen.de  Fri Feb 14 17:55:53 2020
From: jw at witch.westfalen.de (Jutta Wrage)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 23:55:53 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] genalises - no aliases for one od the ists
In-Reply-To: <0f40fe0e-968c-1a45-8d33-df447563f93f@msapiro.net>
References: <28EB3EA8-7CA1-46AE-8129-0DADD09BE9AF@witch.westfalen.de>
 <0f40fe0e-968c-1a45-8d33-df447563f93f@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <3AB35121-7E32-48A2-A716-3FF9CD4EB96C@witch.westfalen.de>


Am 14.02.2020 um 20:37 schrieb Mark Sapiro:

> The list is not in virtual-mailman because the the list's host_name is
> not in POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS. If the host_name is not correct,
> which seems likely, you can change it in the list admin General Options
> page (in the Additional settings section near the bottom). If it is
> correct you will need to add it to the POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS
> list in mm_cfg.py.

Hmm... I tried to add thar with no good results.

The host in config of that list is:
URL: www.host2.exmaple.com
mailinglist-address: list at host2.example.com

I added POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS containing host2.example.com

That did not work.

Just for note:

I hat torouble before with the setting being different for:

DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'www.example.com'
DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'host.example.com'

Mailman added the first one to the aliases for one of the addresses and exim refused mails.
So I did change the url variable to host.example.com

>> Exim does not accept mail for the missing list: 550 Unrouteable address
> 
> 
> If you are using Exim, it is probably better to configure Exim as
> discussed at <https://www.exim.org/howto/mailman21.html> rather than
> using aliases and virtual mappings.

I did follow the instructions.
Now mail for the missing list is accepted but not for the others.

The host now denies my connections.
I guess I have to wait until I can revert changes or add something making the 10 other lists working again.

Jutta

--
http://www.witch.westfalen.de

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 234 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/6a3d9b6b/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 14 18:19:30 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 15:19:30 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] genalises - no aliases for one od the ists
In-Reply-To: <3AB35121-7E32-48A2-A716-3FF9CD4EB96C@witch.westfalen.de>
References: <28EB3EA8-7CA1-46AE-8129-0DADD09BE9AF@witch.westfalen.de>
 <0f40fe0e-968c-1a45-8d33-df447563f93f@msapiro.net>
 <3AB35121-7E32-48A2-A716-3FF9CD4EB96C@witch.westfalen.de>
Message-ID: <b6ad3a1e-ceed-dfa8-3e54-f794f338a717@msapiro.net>

On 2/14/20 2:55 PM, Jutta Wrage wrote:
> 
> The host in config of that list is:
> URL: www.host2.exmaple.com
> mailinglist-address: list at host2.example.com
> 
> I added POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS containing host2.example.com

Did you restart Mailman? (although that shouldn't matter for genaliases)

What is the list's host_name on the General Options page? That is what
needs to be in POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS.

When you say you added POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS, does that mean you
added POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS or does it mean you added
'host2.example.com' to the existing POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS.

In either case, do you have the correct POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS in
mm_cfg.py, not in Defaults.py?

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200214/14710779/attachment-0001.sig>

From jw at witch.westfalen.de  Fri Feb 14 22:07:54 2020
From: jw at witch.westfalen.de (Jutta Wrage)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 04:07:54 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] genalises - no aliases for one od the ists
In-Reply-To: <b6ad3a1e-ceed-dfa8-3e54-f794f338a717@msapiro.net>
References: <28EB3EA8-7CA1-46AE-8129-0DADD09BE9AF@witch.westfalen.de>
 <0f40fe0e-968c-1a45-8d33-df447563f93f@msapiro.net>
 <3AB35121-7E32-48A2-A716-3FF9CD4EB96C@witch.westfalen.de>
 <b6ad3a1e-ceed-dfa8-3e54-f794f338a717@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <5CCAEB42-5399-420B-A510-9CD531CF5601@witch.westfalen.de>


Am 15.02.2020 um 00:19 schrieb Mark Sapiro:

> Did you restart Mailman? (although that shouldn't matter for genaliases)

I did. Same for exim.

> When you say you added POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS, does that mean you
> added POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS or does it mean you added
> 'host2.example.com' to the existing POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS.

I added entries with different combinations.

But now having access to the server again, I did remove it completely again.

I discovered the mailing list address of the list not showing up first may have the address of the default host. But the web page for it is on the virtual host.

Now I have 
DEFAULT_HOST_NAME
DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST
DEFAULT_URL_HOST
all set to: mainhost.example.com

Looks like it is working now without genaliases with exim4.


Now I have to find out how to make changes after upgrading by command line. The web server not yet ready.

Thanks for you hints

Jutta

-- 
http://www.witch.westfalen.de


From fmouse at fmp.com  Sat Feb 15 20:58:41 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 19:58:41 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
Message-ID: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>

We're running Mailman 2.1.18-1 and have a list which is having a porn
spam problem. The list is set to discard posts from non-members, and
the list moderator has set various filters to try to filter on words
which contain "f***", as many do, however the Subject, From and Reply-
to addresses are all UTF-8 strings, and are apparently confusing
Mailman's decision-making functions, and these posts are ending up in
the administrative requests list.  Here's a sample set of headers:

Return-Path: <Abia at multi.net.pk>
Delivered-To: cyberpluckers at autoharp.org
Received: from 202-142-178-114.multi.net.pk ([::ffff:202.142.178.114])
  by linode.fmp.com with ESMTP; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:11:38 -0600
  id 000000000025B215.000000005E480A2B.00002589
Received: from unknown (103.65.14.20)
	by mail.naihautsui.co.kr with SMTP; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 15:02:48 -0800
Received: from asx121.turbo-inline.com ([41.36.184.152]) by qrx.quickslick.com with LOCAL; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 14:51:47 -0800
Received: from unknown (HELO snmp.otwaloow.com) (Sat, 15 Feb 2020 14:48:41 -0800)
	by rly04.hottestmile.com with QMQP; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 14:48:41 -0800
Received: from unknown (137.251.39.90)
	by mail.naihautsui.co.kr with ASMTP; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 14:48:03 -0800
Received: from mail.gimmicc.net [12.159.103.230] by smtp.endend.nl with ESMTP; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 14:40:00 -0800
Message-ID: <455601d5e40d$cd381490$538b0ca1 at Abia>
Reply-To: =?utf-8?B?IkFiaWEiIDxBYmlhQG11bHRpLm5ldC5waz4=?=
From: =?utf-8?B?IkFiaWEiIDxBYmlhQG11bHRpLm5ldC5waz4=?=
To: cyberpluckers at autoharp.org, cyberpluckers-owner at autoharp.org
Subject: =?utf-8?B?SSBJbnN0YUZ1Y2sgUmVxdWVzdCBpcyBQZW5kaW5n?=
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 14:40:00 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_linode-9609-1581779501-0001-2"
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.01

MM is properly decoding the Subject in the message detail headers, but
not the From address.

Is there any way to get these get Mailman to properly handle these?

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "The arc of history is long, but
FMP Computer Services |     it bends toward Justice"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Barack Obama



From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb 15 23:00:16 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 20:00:16 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
Message-ID: <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>

On 2/15/20 5:58 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> We're running Mailman 2.1.18-1 and have a list which is having a porn
> spam problem. The list is set to discard posts from non-members, and
> the list moderator has set various filters to try to filter on words
> which contain "f***", as many do, however the Subject, From and Reply-
> to addresses are all UTF-8 strings, and are apparently confusing
> Mailman's decision-making functions, and these posts are ending up in
> the administrative requests list.  Here's a sample set of headers:


Exactly what filters are used?

header_filter_rules will RFC 2047 decode the headers.
mm_cfg.KNOWN_SPAMMERS and bounce_matching_headers do not, but since
bounce_matching_headers only holds the message, I'm guessing you aren't
using that, and since list owners can't set mm_cfg.KNOWN_SPAMMERS, I'm
guessing you aren't using that either.



> MM is properly decoding the Subject in the message detail headers, but
> not the From address.
> 
> Is there any way to get these get Mailman to properly handle these?


If the only issue is the From: or other sender header, Mailman doesn't
RFC 2047 decode those in trying to determine if the sender is a member,
but what's the issue? If you are trying to match a specific address in
discard_these_nonmembers, I see the problem, but you can discard them by
setting generic_nonmember_action to discard.

If you only want to discard non-member posts with RFC 2047 encoded
From:, you could put something like

^[^@]+@[a-z0-9_.]+$

in hold_these_nonmembers to hold the ones that at least don't have
base64 encoded From:


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

From fmouse at fmp.com  Sun Feb 16 02:20:47 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 01:20:47 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <562e6cd1e15b21abaa6eda30a1a1c12c50e26932.camel@fmp.com>

On Sat, 2020-02-15 at 20:00 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/15/20 5:58 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > We're running Mailman 2.1.18-1 and have a list which is having a porn
> > spam problem. The list is set to discard posts from non-members, and
> > the list moderator has set various filters to try to filter on words
> > which contain "f***", as many do, however the Subject, From and Reply-
> > to addresses are all UTF-8 strings, and are apparently confusing
> > Mailman's decision-making functions, and these posts are ending up in
> > the administrative requests list.  Here's a sample set of headers:
> 
> 
> Exactly what filters are used?

The only filter relevant to this issue is "(?i)Subject: .*[fuck]". It
apparently isn't working, or the syntax isn't proper (although the re
syntax looks OK to me. I didn't put it there, the list admin/moderator
did.

> header_filter_rules will RFC 2047 decode the headers.

We don't know what to put into the rules for From and Reply-to since
these are encoded in the message detail, as they are in the displayed
headers. And even if the from headers could be put here, it is, as I
said, a game of whack-a-mole.

The held message page section header is no help, i.e.

                              Held Messages
              ----------------------------------------------
     From:=?utf-8?b?ik1hcmlliia8twfyawvay29ty2fzdgj1c2luzxnzlm5ldd4=?=

                                 etc.....

> mm_cfg.KNOWN_SPAMMERS and bounce_matching_headers do not, but since
> bounce_matching_headers only holds the message, I'm guessing you aren't
> using that, and since list owners can't set mm_cfg.KNOWN_SPAMMERS, I'm
> guessing you aren't using that either.

I run the system, and have access to mm_cfg, so I can put what's
necressary there, But I would assume one would have to match decoded
>From headers, and all these headers in the held posts are encoded.
They're mostly different from message to message, so in any event
blocking by From header, either encoded or decoded is as I said an
exercise in whack-a-mole.

> > MM is properly decoding the Subject in the message detail headers, but
> > not the From address.
> > 
> > Is there any way to get these get Mailman to properly handle these?
> 
> 
> If the only issue is the From: or other sender header, Mailman doesn't
> RFC 2047 decode those in trying to determine if the sender is a member,
> but what's the issue? If you are trying to match a specific address in
> discard_these_nonmembers, I see the problem, but you can discard them by
> setting generic_nonmember_action to discard.

This _is_ how it's set.

> If you only want to discard non-member posts with RFC 2047 encoded
> From:, you could put something like
> 
> ^[^@]+@[a-z0-9_.]+$

> in hold_these_nonmembers to hold the ones that at least don't have
> base64 encoded From:

The list manager has set generic_nonmember_action to Discard, which
should be the last word, _unless_ the _decoded_ from address shows up
in some other place such that the message is held for approval rather
than discarded outright, which is the desired action.
generic_nomemember_action only comes into play if "no explicit action
is defined", so perhaps there's a match somewhere, but again, the From
headers are encoded in the held message detail, so it's hard to tell.
The offending poster may even have joined the list (the list moderator
has default_member_moderation turned on.) 

Is there function or class method in the Python code which can be used
to decode these headers? As you may recall, I'm somewhat Python
literate - actually a minor contributor to the MM 2 code base :)

I also looked at bounce_matching_headers. The explanation and name on
this setting is ambiguous since the name implies a full bounce, but the
explanation says that posts are "held" [for moderation].
 
-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "The arc of history is long, but
FMP Computer Services |     it bends toward Justice"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Barack Obama



From fmouse at fmp.com  Sun Feb 16 13:17:00 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 12:17:00 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>

Here's a more concise summary:

On Sat, 2020-02-15 at 20:00 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/15/20 5:58 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > We're running Mailman 2.1.18-1 and have a list which is having a porn
> > spam problem. The list is set to discard posts from non-members, and
> > the list moderator has set various filters to try to filter on words
> > which contain "f***", as many do, however the Subject, From and Reply-
> > to addresses are all UTF-8 strings, and are apparently confusing
> > Mailman's decision-making functions, and these posts are ending up in
> > the administrative requests list.  Here's a sample set of headers:
> >
> > From: =?utf-8?B?IkFiaWEiIDxBYmlhQG11bHRpLm5ldC5waz4=?=
[snip..]

* The list admin wants to discard, not hold, _all_ nonmember
submissions. These "problem posts" are getting held, not discarded.

* generic_nonmember_action is set to "Discard" but this isn't working
for these posts.

* From and Reply-to addresses on "problem posts" are base64 (utf-8 ?)
encoded, both in the held post detail and on the held post listing
page, so there's no way of identifying the addresses they represent. They may actually be subscribed in their decoded form, or handled in
some other context which prescribes that they be held, not discarded.
(New member posts are moderated by default via
default_member_moderation.)

* From and Reply-to addresses differ from one to another of these
"problem posts", so blocking individual sender addresses is useless, as
is usually the case with spam.

* MM spam filters are apparently irrelevant to this issue.

> If you only want to discard non-member posts with RFC 2047 encoded
> From:, you could put something like
> 
> ^[^@]+@[a-z0-9_.]+$
> 
> in hold_these_nonmembers to hold the ones that at least don't have
> base64 encoded From:

We could use

^[^@]+$

in hold_these_nonmembers and this _might_ discard the base64
addressed "problem posts", but would _hold_ other non-member posts,
which isn't the result we want. We want to discard _all_ non-member
posts, and the problem is that these base64-addressed posts _are_ being
held and not discarded. 

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "The arc of history is long, but
FMP Computer Services |     it bends toward Justice"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Barack Obama



From Richard at Damon-Family.org  Sun Feb 16 14:09:48 2020
From: Richard at Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 14:09:48 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
Message-ID: <608c7bbb-3728-7e9c-1795-087e0ca77b19@Damon-Family.org>

One thing to note is that you seem to have two different filters at work 
here, one being non-member post, which you want to Discard, and messages 
with 'bad' words in the subject, which you define to Hold. A message 
which matches both filters will be acted by the first filter that the 
message hits.

I have found that on the list I run, which is on a shared server so I am 
limited to what I can control, the spam filters are checked BEFORE the 
non-member filter, so if I define a spam filter, it can cause me to see 
messages that would otherwise be discarded. This says that I don't want 
to be too aggressive with these filters, as they will create work for me.

If you can adjust the configuration of mailman, you may want to move the 
filter that discards non-member posts before your spam filters.


From fmouse at fmp.com  Sun Feb 16 14:52:04 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 13:52:04 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <608c7bbb-3728-7e9c-1795-087e0ca77b19@Damon-Family.org>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
 <608c7bbb-3728-7e9c-1795-087e0ca77b19@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID: <4684bc813198fee33e8ac8b9d770773774785399.camel@fmp.com>

On Sun, 2020-02-16 at 14:09 -0500, Richard Damon wrote:
> One thing to note is that you seem to have two different filters at work 
> here, one being non-member post, which you want to Discard, and messages 
> with 'bad' words in the subject, which you define to Hold. A message 
> which matches both filters will be acted by the first filter that the 
> message hits.

The only relevant spam filter in effect here is:

(?i)Subject: .*[f---]
[dashes substituted to avoid downline filters on this list]

The disposition (Action) specified for this filter is Discard, not
Hold. I don't believe we have a "bad words" filter as such, nor a
relevant criterion which is set to "Hold" which might override existing
settings. Some of these problem posts don't have "f---" in the Subject
header, (e.g. "I Instacheat") but contain "f---" in the body. Filtering
on the body content for prohibited words, if it's supported (and I
don't think it is), should not trump generic_nonmember_action, which is
why I suspect the problem posts may be from moderated members, but the
list has 859 members, most of whom are legit but unknown to the list
admin.

The primary problem here is what I identified as ascii-armored UTF-8
encoding (Mark says they're wrapped in base64 encoding) so we don't
have any idea what the _real_ From address is, so we can't search the
subscriber list, nor set up specific rules by sender address.

The Administrative Requests list decodes the Subject header, which is
similarly encoded, but not the From address. Without this, we're
shooting in the dark. As I said, if the spamming senders address is
actually a moderated subscriber we have no way of knowing from the
information provided by MM 2.

Since the code is in MM2 to decode base64 headers, which it does for
the similarly encoded Subject, I should probably hack the MM code to
make it do the same for the From header before showing it in the list
of Administrative Requests (or someone else could do this, probably
faster than I could).

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "The arc of history is long, but
FMP Computer Services |     it bends toward Justice"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Barack Obama



From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 16 15:08:53 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 12:08:53 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
Message-ID: <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>

Munged a few words.

On 2/15/20 11:20 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:

> The only filter relevant to this issue is "(?i)Subject: .*[f...]".

The (?i) is irrelevant as the match always ignores case. Also, I don't
think that's what you want as it will match any Subject that contains
any of the letters f, u, c, k in either case. What is the action of this
rule?


On 2/16/20 10:17 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> 
> We want to discard _all_ non-member
> posts, and the problem is that these base64-addressed posts _are_ being
> held and not discarded. 


If generic_nonmember_action is Discard, non-member posts should be
discarded unless some prior test causes them to be held. Things which
could cause a hold are in order:

A match on a header_filter_rule with a Hold action.

One of the addresses returned by get_senders() is a moderated member and
member_moderation_action is Hold.

None of the addresses returned by get_senders() is a member and the
address returned by get_sender() matches an entry in hold_these_nonmembers

An address returned by get_senders() is an unmoderated member and the
list's emergency setting is Yes.

What is the reason given for the hold?

In the case of the message headers in your OP, get_senders() will return
a list like

['=?utf-8?b?ikfiaweiidxbymlhqg11bhrplm5ldc5waz4=?=',
'abia at multi.net.pk',
'=?utf-8?b?ikfiaweiidxbymlhqg11bhrplm5ldc5waz4=?=']

which are lowercased versions of respectively, the undecoded From:, The
unix from which I deduce from Return-Path: and the undecoded Reply-To:.
Both the original From: and Reply-To: decode to

"Abia" <Abia at multi.net.pk>

msg.get_sender() returns '=?utf-8?b?ikfiaweiidxbymlhqg11bhrplm5ldc5waz4=?='

>From what you've said, that message whose decoded Subject: header is

Subject: I InstaF... Request is Pending

would match the header_filter_rule and be handled per that rule's
action, but then so would a message with

Subject: It's a fine day

You can decode these headers like

python
...
>>> from email.header import decode_header
>>> decode_header('=?utf-8?B?IkFiaWEiIDxBYmlhQG11bHRpLm5ldC5waz4=?=')
[('"Abia" <Abia at multi.net.pk>', 'utf-8')]


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

From fmouse at fmp.com  Sun Feb 16 15:44:57 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 14:44:57 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
 <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <c5faacdfb063a5ba97c7e08b071cfd411077b182.camel@fmp.com>

On Sun, 2020-02-16 at 12:08 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Munged a few words.
> 
> On 2/15/20 11:20 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> 
> > The only filter relevant to this issue is "(?i)Subject: .*[f...]".
> 
> The (?i) is irrelevant as the match always ignores case. Also, I don't
> think that's what you want as it will match any Subject that contains
> any of the letters f, u, c, k in either case. What is the action of this
> rule?

Discard.

> On 2/16/20 10:17 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > 
> > We want to discard _all_ non-member
> > posts, and the problem is that these base64-addressed posts _are_ being
> > held and not discarded. 
> 
> 
> If generic_nonmember_action is Discard, non-member posts should be
> discarded unless some prior test causes them to be held. Things which
> could cause a hold are in order:
> 
> A match on a header_filter_rule with a Hold action.

Possible. The "Reason" is "The message headers matched a filter rule"


> One of the addresses returned by get_senders() is a moderated member and
> member_moderation_action is Hold.

This is certainly a possiblity. I see that you've given me some code to
work with below. I'll explore this. Thanks!

> None of the addresses returned by get_senders() is a member and the
> address returned by get_sender() matches an entry in
> hold_these_nonmembers

hold_these_nonmembers is empty.

> An address returned by get_senders() is an unmoderated member and the
> list's emergency setting is Yes.

It is No.

> What is the reason given for the hold?

"The message headers matched a filter rule"

hmmmm

> In the case of the message headers in your OP, get_senders() will
> return
> a list like
> 
> ['=?utf-8?b?ikfiaweiidxbymlhqg11bhrplm5ldc5waz4=?=',
> 'abia at multi.net.pk',
> '=?utf-8?b?ikfiaweiidxbymlhqg11bhrplm5ldc5waz4=?=']
> 
> which are lowercased versions of respectively, the undecoded From:,
> The
> unix from which I deduce from Return-Path: and the undecoded Reply-
> To:.
> Both the original From: and Reply-To: decode to
> 
> "Abia" <Abia at multi.net.pk>
> 
> msg.get_sender() returns '=?utf-
> 8?b?ikfiaweiidxbymlhqg11bhrplm5ldc5waz4=?='
> 
> From what you've said, that message whose decoded Subject: header is
> 
> Subject: I InstaF... Request is Pending
> 
> would match the header_filter_rule and be handled per that rule's
> action, but then so would a message with
> 
> Subject: It's a fine day

I substituted for "uck" where it showed up to avoid hitting subscriber
filters on _this_ list.

> You can decode these headers like
> 
> python
> ...
> > > > from email.header import decode_header
> > > > decode_header('=?utf-
> > > > 8?B?IkFiaWEiIDxBYmlhQG11bHRpLm5ldC5waz4=?=')
> 
> [('"Abia" <Abia at multi.net.pk>', 'utf-8')]

Thanks!!! This is the tool I need, however the list administrator
doesn't have access to the Python interactive shell on this system, and
these messages seem to have different encoded From headers (I'll check
this). We need some way going forward so that she can get these
discarded at the git-go without having to run get_senders() on each
one.

This may not be possible. One of the characteristics of spam is that
it's like clouds in the sky. One particular type and form may all over
you one day, and completely gone the next.

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "The arc of history is long, but
FMP Computer Services |     it bends toward Justice"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Barack Obama



From fmouse at fmp.com  Sun Feb 16 16:10:27 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 15:10:27 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
 <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <faf9effc0d4417a60c23294453b340de98b2a2a9.camel@fmp.com>

On Sun, 2020-02-16 at 12:08 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> A match on a header_filter_rule with a Hold action.

One question, Mark. Are the spam filter rules ("header_filter_rules")
applied _before_ or _after_ a message with a uuencoded (base64) From
address is decoded?

If _before_ (matching what we see in on the Administrative Requests
page), the it should be sufficient to discard any message with a From
header staring with "=?utf-8".

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "The arc of history is long, but
FMP Computer Services |     it bends toward Justice"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Barack Obama



From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 16 16:20:30 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 13:20:30 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <c5faacdfb063a5ba97c7e08b071cfd411077b182.camel@fmp.com>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
 <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>
 <c5faacdfb063a5ba97c7e08b071cfd411077b182.camel@fmp.com>
Message-ID: <77c8bf25-3c64-858a-3a48-228e6eddc100@msapiro.net>

On 2/16/20 12:44 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:

> 
> Possible. The "Reason" is "The message headers matched a filter rule"


Then there must be a rule with Hold action before (above) your discard
rule, and as I've noted, your discard rule is way too broad, matching a
character class rather than a word.

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

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 16 16:33:23 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 13:33:23 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] UTF-8 From and Reply-to addresses not getting
 properly processed.
In-Reply-To: <faf9effc0d4417a60c23294453b340de98b2a2a9.camel@fmp.com>
References: <2b2b61152e7982a70fc3f9f1beb51862fbae1fc6.camel@fmp.com>
 <eee4efb9-85d7-a109-4b84-43ebe5ed443b@msapiro.net>
 <76c190c24013207e872e20b7c07589389600d440.camel@fmp.com>
 <38305aff-8380-74eb-dd64-998c3499a9be@msapiro.net>
 <faf9effc0d4417a60c23294453b340de98b2a2a9.camel@fmp.com>
Message-ID: <34d65102-88b8-f206-985c-35ec8f9b4cbf@msapiro.net>

On 2/16/20 1:10 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> 
> One question, Mark. Are the spam filter rules ("header_filter_rules")
> applied _before_ or _after_ a message with a uuencoded (base64) From
> address is decoded?


As I said before, header_filter_rules are matched against the decoded
headers.


> If _before_ (matching what we see in on the Administrative Requests
> page), the it should be sufficient to discard any message with a From
> header staring with "=?utf-8".


You won't see that. Further, there may be legitimate  From: headers with
a utf-8 encoded fragment if, e.g., the From: display name is non-ascii.

Also note that your problem messages are non-compliant. RFC 2047,
section 5(3) is clear

+ An 'encoded-word' MUST NOT appear in any portion of an 'addr-spec'.

<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2047.html#section-5>

Your real issue here is whatever header_filter_rule with hold action
above the discard rule is matching. That is what is preventing
generic_nonmember_action from discarding the message.

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

From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Sun Feb 16 23:45:22 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:45:22 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Dennis Putnam writes:

 > Since migrating to mailman 3 on the latest RHEL is going to take some
 > time, I need an interim solution to DMARC mitigation. I understand
 > version 2.1.18

Why 2.1.18?  Do you have that already installed?  It's already pretty
old, and many of the fixes still being made are security-related.

 > will do what I need, at least until I can finish the
 > migration. However, I have been unable to find a repository or rpm
 > for that version for RHEL 5. Can someone help me out with that?

The Red Hat or Fedora lists would be a much better place to ask.
We're not likely to know, and we can't provide much support except
generic comments since we're generally not using packaged versions of
Mailman, even for testing.  We just don't have the time.

Steve

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Mon Feb 17 05:27:53 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 05:27:53 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>

On 2/16/2020 11:45 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Dennis Putnam writes:
>
>  > Since migrating to mailman 3 on the latest RHEL is going to take some
>  > time, I need an interim solution to DMARC mitigation. I understand
>  > version 2.1.18
>
> Why 2.1.18?  Do you have that already installed?  It's already pretty
> old, and many of the fixes still being made are security-related.
It turns out that the only version available for RHEL 7 is 2.1.12.
However, the mailman documentation indicates that also has DMARC
mitigation. Anyway, I am giving it a try. Seems silly that RHEL
repositories are so far behind the curve.
>
>  > will do what I need, at least until I can finish the
>  > migration. However, I have been unable to find a repository or rpm
>  > for that version for RHEL 5. Can someone help me out with that?
>
> The Red Hat or Fedora lists would be a much better place to ask.
> We're not likely to know, and we can't provide much support except
> generic comments since we're generally not using packaged versions of
> Mailman, even for testing.  We just don't have the time.
>
> Steve


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200217/6e42a9de/attachment-0001.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Mon Feb 17 05:27:53 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 05:27:53 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>

On 2/16/2020 11:45 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Dennis Putnam writes:
>
>  > Since migrating to mailman 3 on the latest RHEL is going to take some
>  > time, I need an interim solution to DMARC mitigation. I understand
>  > version 2.1.18
>
> Why 2.1.18?  Do you have that already installed?  It's already pretty
> old, and many of the fixes still being made are security-related.
It turns out that the only version available for RHEL 7 is 2.1.12.
However, the mailman documentation indicates that also has DMARC
mitigation. Anyway, I am giving it a try. Seems silly that RHEL
repositories are so far behind the curve.
>
>  > will do what I need, at least until I can finish the
>  > migration. However, I have been unable to find a repository or rpm
>  > for that version for RHEL 5. Can someone help me out with that?
>
> The Red Hat or Fedora lists would be a much better place to ask.
> We're not likely to know, and we can't provide much support except
> generic comments since we're generally not using packaged versions of
> Mailman, even for testing.  We just don't have the time.
>
> Steve


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200217/6e42a9de/attachment-0002.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Mon Feb 17 05:46:58 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 05:46:58 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Configuration 2.1.12
References: <a3dec17f-41ad-4649-7bd7-dfbd128084b6.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <a3dec17f-41ad-4649-7bd7-dfbd128084b6@bellsouth.net>

I have mailman 2.1.12 installed on RHEL 7 (that is the latest version
available in the RHEL 7 repository). When I try to access the mailman
web pages (apache 2.4) I get the error:

[Mon Feb 17 03:43:04.099892 2020] [authz_core:error] [pid 30156] [client
162.230.29.192:49655] AH01630: client denied by server configuration:
/usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo

Here is my mailman.conf file:

#
#? httpd configuration settings for use with mailman.
#

ScriptAlias /mailman/ /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/
<Directory /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/>
??? AllowOverride None
??? Options ExecCGI
??? Order allow,deny
??? Allow from all
</Directory>


Alias /pipermail/ /usr/lib/mailman/archives/public/
<Directory /usr/lib/mailman/archives/public>
??? Options Indexes MultiViews FollowSymLinks
??? AllowOverride None
??? Order allow,deny
??? Allow from all
</Directory>

# Uncomment the following line, replacing www.example.com with your server's
# name, to redirect queries to /mailman to the listinfo page (recommended).

RedirectMatch ^/$ http://galene.csd.net/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk

Since it looks correct to me, perhaps some new eyes can see what I am
missing. TIA.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200217/6676f319/attachment.sig>

From mailmanu-20190215 at billmail.scconsult.com  Mon Feb 17 10:56:03 2020
From: mailmanu-20190215 at billmail.scconsult.com (Bill Cole)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 10:56:03 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <6FA6CB31-07CC-4AF8-B91C-270B67CC199F@billmail.scconsult.com>

On 17 Feb 2020, at 5:27, Dennis Putnam wrote:

> On 2/16/2020 11:45 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> Dennis Putnam writes:
>>
>>> Since migrating to mailman 3 on the latest RHEL is going to take 
>>> some
>>> time, I need an interim solution to DMARC mitigation. I understand
>>> version 2.1.18
>>
>> Why 2.1.18?  Do you have that already installed?  It's already pretty
>> old, and many of the fixes still being made are security-related.
> It turns out that the only version available for RHEL 7 is 2.1.12.
> However, the mailman documentation indicates that also has DMARC
> mitigation. Anyway, I am giving it a try. Seems silly that RHEL
> repositories are so far behind the curve.

RedHat has a policy of nailing down nominal versions of software with 
each major RHEL release and then backporting whatever fixes they deem 
important into their packages over the life of the major release, adding 
their own subordinate versioning. I know from working on the 
SpamAssassin security team that RH is particularly attentive to security 
issues and other major bugfixes.

-- 
Bill Cole
bill at scconsult.com or billcole at apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not For Hire (currently)

From phils at caerllewys.net  Mon Feb 17 11:45:51 2020
From: phils at caerllewys.net (Phil Stracchino)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:45:51 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <6FA6CB31-07CC-4AF8-B91C-270B67CC199F@billmail.scconsult.com>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
 <6FA6CB31-07CC-4AF8-B91C-270B67CC199F@billmail.scconsult.com>
Message-ID: <4dc5e90a-c49f-6567-615a-545834663303@caerllewys.net>

On 2020-02-17 10:56, Bill Cole wrote:
> RedHat has a policy of nailing down nominal versions of software with 
> each major RHEL release and then backporting whatever fixes they deem 
> important into their packages over the life of the major release, adding 
> their own subordinate versioning. I know from working on the 
> SpamAssassin security team that RH is particularly attentive to security 
> issues and other major bugfixes.


An unfortunate side effect of this is that it makes it very difficult to
support some software on Red Hat because you don't know for sure what
codebase you're actually running, except that it's probably neither fish
nor fowl nor good red meat.


-- 
  Phil Stracchino
  Babylon Communications
  phils at caerllewys.net
  phil at co.ordinate.org
  Landline: +1.603.293.8485
  Mobile:   +1.603.998.6958

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb 17 12:08:01 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 09:08:01 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Server Configuration 2.1.12
In-Reply-To: <a3dec17f-41ad-4649-7bd7-dfbd128084b6@bellsouth.net>
References: <a3dec17f-41ad-4649-7bd7-dfbd128084b6.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <a3dec17f-41ad-4649-7bd7-dfbd128084b6@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <301d56c7-d0d2-cfce-450f-2e796bc3a16b@msapiro.net>

On 2/17/20 2:46 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> 
> [Mon Feb 17 03:43:04.099892 2020] [authz_core:error] [pid 30156] [client
> 162.230.29.192:49655] AH01630: client denied by server configuration:
> /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo
> 
> Here is my mailman.conf file:
> 
> #
> #? httpd configuration settings for use with mailman.
> #
> 
> ScriptAlias /mailman/ /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/
> <Directory /usr/lib/mailman/cgi-bin/>
> ??? AllowOverride None
> ??? Options ExecCGI
> ??? Order allow,deny
> ??? Allow from all

This changed in apache 2.4. Instead of the above 2 lines, you need

    Require all granted


> </Directory>
> 
> 
> Alias /pipermail/ /usr/lib/mailman/archives/public/
> <Directory /usr/lib/mailman/archives/public>
> ??? Options Indexes MultiViews FollowSymLinks
> ??? AllowOverride None
> ??? Order allow,deny
> ??? Allow from all

Same here


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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200217/2515f5e7/attachment.sig>

From fmouse at fmp.com  Mon Feb 17 12:24:36 2020
From: fmouse at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley (linode))
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:24:36 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <4dc5e90a-c49f-6567-615a-545834663303@caerllewys.net>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
 <6FA6CB31-07CC-4AF8-B91C-270B67CC199F@billmail.scconsult.com>
 <4dc5e90a-c49f-6567-615a-545834663303@caerllewys.net>
Message-ID: <170EC963-B967-4673-8546-64D89FDF4B9B@fmp.com>


On Feb 17, 2020, at 10:45 AM, Phil Stracchino <phils at caerllewys.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 2020-02-17 10:56, Bill Cole wrote:
>> RedHat has a policy of nailing down nominal versions of software with 
>> each major RHEL release and then backporting whatever fixes they deem 
>> important into their packages over the life of the major release, adding 
>> their own subordinate versioning. 

> An unfortunate side effect of this is that it makes it very difficult to
> support some software on Red Hat because you don't know for sure what
> codebase you're actually running, except that it's probably neither fish
> nor fowl nor good red meat.

This is common practice for all major distributions. The only way to keep up with upstream versions is to install from same from the git-go. This has its own pitfalls, but I do this for Mailman and have never had a problem.

Sent from my iPhone



From dmaziuk at bmrb.wisc.edu  Mon Feb 17 12:37:06 2020
From: dmaziuk at bmrb.wisc.edu (dmaziuk)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:37:06 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <170EC963-B967-4673-8546-64D89FDF4B9B@fmp.com>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
 <6FA6CB31-07CC-4AF8-B91C-270B67CC199F@billmail.scconsult.com>
 <4dc5e90a-c49f-6567-615a-545834663303@caerllewys.net>
 <170EC963-B967-4673-8546-64D89FDF4B9B@fmp.com>
Message-ID: <845e819e-c6c4-675b-6d08-005dc1f5239f@bmrb.wisc.edu>

On 2/17/2020 11:24 AM, Lindsay Haisley (linode) wrote:
> 

> This is common practice for all major distributions. The only way to keep up with upstream versions is to install from same from the git-go. This has its own pitfalls, but I do this for Mailman and have never had a problem.

I'm still hoping to some day get a round tuit for trying to fit MM2 in a 
docker container. You know exactly what codebase you have from the 
git-go, and if the new one does not cut it, the good old container is 
still there to fall back to.

The clue is strong with docker people.

D

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb 17 13:05:16 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 10:05:16 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman 2.1.18 for RHEL 5
In-Reply-To: <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
References: <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <6c293a72-ca32-0de2-28dc-6b208ef29b4e@bellsouth.net>
 <24138.6754.229996.531354@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <423adb51-2063-dfba-025b-9c8a713b290c@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <f2f5ef42-e0f2-0988-5d23-88a9b98dc6b1@msapiro.net>

On 2/17/20 2:27 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:

> It turns out that the only version available for RHEL 7 is 2.1.12.
> However, the mailman documentation indicates that also has DMARC
> mitigation.


What documentation? I assume Red Hat's. In any case, what you will have,
as others have said, is 2.1.12 with who knows what later features and
fixes backported by Red Hat to make what they call 2.1.12-xx.yy, and if
you run into trouble, we (this list) my not be able to help.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200217/320dc2cd/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb 17 18:44:18 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 15:44:18 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman 2.1.30rc1 released
In-Reply-To: <5a026b89-f93a-e544-a4a2-9e3a5bcc50e6@msapiro.net>
References: <5a026b89-f93a-e544-a4a2-9e3a5bcc50e6@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <f90b5a96-6f69-1c6c-b36f-df3120294f04@msapiro.net>

Over a month ago, I posted the following announcement particularly
asking for i18n updates prior to the final release of Mailman 2.1.

To date I have only received updates for the Japanese translation.

If you can help update any of the other translations, please submit
changes as indicated below.


On 1/11/20 7:09 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> I am pleased to announce the release of Mailman 2.1.30rc1.
> 
> Python 2.6 is the minimum supported, but Python 2.7 is strongly recommended.
> 
> This is a routine bug fix release with a few new features. See the
> attached README.txt for details.
> 
> Mailman 2.1.30 will be the last release of the Mailman 2.1 branch from
> the GNU Mailman project. It contains some new strings which are
> untranslated in most of the i18n translations. If you can help update
> any of the translations, please contribute your changes.
> 
> Changes can be submitted via a bzr merge proposal on Launchpad or by
> sending an updated mailman.po file and or templates directly to me. This
> will be the last chance to get i18n updates into a release.
> 
> Mailman is free software for managing email mailing lists and
> e-newsletters. Mailman is used for all the python.org and
> SourceForge.net mailing lists, as well as at hundreds of other sites.
> 
> For more information, please see our web site at one of:
> 
> http://www.list.org
> https://www.gnu.org/software/mailman
> http://mailman.sourceforge.net/
> 
> Mailman 2.1.30rc1 can be downloaded from
> 
> https://launchpad.net/mailman/2.1/
> https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/mailman/
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/mailman/


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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200217/c90a8c7a/attachment-0001.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 19 13:04:23 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 10:04:23 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] I18n for Mailman 2.1.30
In-Reply-To: <f90b5a96-6f69-1c6c-b36f-df3120294f04@msapiro.net>
References: <5a026b89-f93a-e544-a4a2-9e3a5bcc50e6@msapiro.net>
 <f90b5a96-6f69-1c6c-b36f-df3120294f04@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <eb381ed7-ba73-299b-7aad-eabdace5bc61@msapiro.net>

On 2/17/20 3:44 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Over a month ago, I posted the following announcement particularly
> asking for i18n updates prior to the final release of Mailman 2.1.
> 
> To date I have only received updates for the Japanese translation.


I have now received an updated German translation thanks to Ludwig
Reiter. I have also received a work in progress of the Brazilian
Portugese translation from Emerson de Mello, so no one else needs to
work on 'de' or 'pt_BR'.

If you can help with any of the other translations you can submit a bzr
merge proposal on Launchpad or send an updated mailman.po file and or
templates directly to me.

I would like to get all this by the end of March.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200219/5706ad00/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Tue Feb 25 05:36:01 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 05:36:01 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Membership List Include Legend Link Wrong
References: <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac@bellsouth.net>

The link to include legend on the membership management page is:

http://localhost.localdomain/mailman/admin/rushtalk/members/list?legend=yes

Why is that not defaulting to the real host and how do I fix it? TIA.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200225/83529ed8/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Tue Feb 25 05:49:20 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 05:49:20 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Archives Permission Denied
References: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>

I am in the process of migrating mailman to a new server. It seems to
have been done correctly but mailman is unable to write to the archive
files.

IOError: [Errno 13] Permission denied:
'/var/lib/mailman/archives/private/rushtalk/2020-February.txt'

?I ran check_perms and it found no issues. However, when I look at the
ownership of the archives I get this:

-rw-r--r--.??? 1 root mailman?? 72404 Feb 16 14:26 2020-February.txt

Shouldn't either the owner be mailman or permissions be -rw-rw-r--? TIA.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200225/3c897c54/attachment.sig>

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Tue Feb 25 09:34:22 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 09:34:22 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Archives Permission Denied
In-Reply-To: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>
References: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <837fb77e-4502-7f60-c361-b2a975cd2643@emwd.com>

On 2/25/20 5:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> IOError: [Errno 13] Permission denied:
> '/var/lib/mailman/archives/private/rushtalk/2020-February.txt'
>
>  ?I ran check_perms and it found no issues. However, when I look at the
> ownership of the archives I get this:
>
> -rw-r--r--.??? 1 root mailman?? 72404 Feb 16 14:26 2020-February.txt
>
> Shouldn't either the owner be mailman or permissions be -rw-rw-r--? TIA.

Hi Dennis,

I hope you are doing well.

 From what I am seeing with my own servers, the permissions should be 664.

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/

Mailan 2 & 3 Hosting
https://www.mailmanhost.com


From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Tue Feb 25 09:37:06 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 09:37:06 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Membership List Include Legend Link Wrong
In-Reply-To: <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac@bellsouth.net>
References: <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <851d1e0a-0901-e9f9-19be-cdbda46d4065@emwd.com>

On 2/25/20 5:36 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> The link to include legend on the membership management page is:
>
> http://localhost.localdomain/mailman/admin/rushtalk/members/list?legend=yes
>
> Why is that not defaulting to the real host and how do I fix it? TIA.

Have you tried running:

/mailman_installation_directory/bin/withlist -l -r fix_url listname -u 
listdomain

for the list to see if that fixes the issue?

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
https://discourse.emwd.com/

Mailman 2 & 3 Hosting
https://www.mailmanhost.com


From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb 25 12:12:55 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 09:12:55 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Archives Permission Denied
In-Reply-To: <837fb77e-4502-7f60-c361-b2a975cd2643@emwd.com>
References: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>
 <837fb77e-4502-7f60-c361-b2a975cd2643@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <150a9bc8-7fbb-af07-4bd7-0d05e7b4113c@msapiro.net>

On 2/25/20 6:34 AM, Brian Carpenter wrote:
> On 2/25/20 5:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> IOError: [Errno 13] Permission denied:
>> '/var/lib/mailman/archives/private/rushtalk/2020-February.txt'
>>
>> ??I ran check_perms and it found no issues. However, when I look at the
>> ownership of the archives I get this:
>>
>> -rw-r--r--.??? 1 root mailman?? 72404 Feb 16 14:26 2020-February.txt
>>
>> Shouldn't either the owner be mailman or permissions be -rw-rw-r--? TIA.
> 
...
> From what I am seeing with my own servers, the permissions should be 664.
> 

That's true, but more importantly, /var/lib/mailman/ should be 2775 and
group mailman as should all the sub-directories  archives, data, lists,
locks, logs, qfiles and spam. /var/lib/mailman/archives/private is
tricky. it should be group mailman and either 2771 or owned by the web
server user and 2770. See
<https://www.list.org/mailman-install/node9.html> for more on this.

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

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Tue Feb 25 13:20:00 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 13:20:00 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Membership List Include Legend Link Wrong
In-Reply-To: <851d1e0a-0901-e9f9-19be-cdbda46d4065@emwd.com>
References: <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <5f54f86b-8fc3-d33b-5b86-c5f0187efbac@bellsouth.net>
 <851d1e0a-0901-e9f9-19be-cdbda46d4065@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <861669b4-47e5-36bb-00a6-d61ff94602cb@bellsouth.net>

On 2/25/2020 9:37 AM, Brian Carpenter wrote:
> On 2/25/20 5:36 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> The link to include legend on the membership management page is:
>>
>> http://localhost.localdomain/mailman/admin/rushtalk/members/list?legend=yes
>>
>>
>> Why is that not defaulting to the real host and how do I fix it? TIA.
>
> Have you tried running:
>
> /mailman_installation_directory/bin/withlist -l -r fix_url listname -u
> listdomain
>
> for the list to see if that fixes the issue?
>
Yes, I did that once when I first start the migration but I must have
made some inadvertent changes at some point. I ran it again and it
worked. Thanks.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200225/29e51770/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Tue Feb 25 13:25:05 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 13:25:05 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Archives Permission Denied
In-Reply-To: <150a9bc8-7fbb-af07-4bd7-0d05e7b4113c@msapiro.net>
References: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>
 <837fb77e-4502-7f60-c361-b2a975cd2643@emwd.com>
 <150a9bc8-7fbb-af07-4bd7-0d05e7b4113c@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <f63b7391-12ad-eabe-92c9-7d3f974b8e51@bellsouth.net>

On 2/25/2020 12:12 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/25/20 6:34 AM, Brian Carpenter wrote:
>> On 2/25/20 5:49 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>> IOError: [Errno 13] Permission denied:
>>> '/var/lib/mailman/archives/private/rushtalk/2020-February.txt'
>>>
>>> ??I ran check_perms and it found no issues. However, when I look at the
>>> ownership of the archives I get this:
>>>
>>> -rw-r--r--.??? 1 root mailman?? 72404 Feb 16 14:26 2020-February.txt
>>>
>>> Shouldn't either the owner be mailman or permissions be -rw-rw-r--? TIA.
> ...
>> From what I am seeing with my own servers, the permissions should be 664.
>>
> That's true, but more importantly, /var/lib/mailman/ should be 2775 and
> group mailman as should all the sub-directories  archives, data, lists,
> locks, logs, qfiles and spam. /var/lib/mailman/archives/private is
> tricky. it should be group mailman and either 2771 or owned by the web
> server user and 2770. See
> <https://www.list.org/mailman-install/node9.html> for more on this.
>
So shouldn't 'check_perms -f' have fixed that?

This is a server used strictly for mailman. There are only 2 users with
access so I am not worried about the caveat in that article. It looks
like you are giving me options and I am not sure what to do now?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200225/49a779a4/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb 25 17:11:29 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:11:29 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Archives Permission Denied
In-Reply-To: <f63b7391-12ad-eabe-92c9-7d3f974b8e51@bellsouth.net>
References: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>
 <837fb77e-4502-7f60-c361-b2a975cd2643@emwd.com>
 <150a9bc8-7fbb-af07-4bd7-0d05e7b4113c@msapiro.net>
 <f63b7391-12ad-eabe-92c9-7d3f974b8e51@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <86a4d9e4-a0f1-e307-ef7b-f6bf588c4a03@msapiro.net>

On 2/25/20 10:25 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:

> So shouldn't 'check_perms -f' have fixed that?


check_perms is not perfect. See below for more.


> This is a server used strictly for mailman. There are only 2 users with
> access so I am not worried about the caveat in that article. It looks
> like you are giving me options and I am not sure what to do now?


Either way works, but in your case, I would ensure
/var/lib/mailman/archives/private is group mailman and mode is 2771.
With this setting, check_perms will say

> Warning: Private archive directory is other-executable (o+x).
>          This could allow other users on your system to read private archives.
>          If you're on a shared multiuser system, you should consult the
>          installation manual on how to fix this.

which you can ignore. The reason I suggest this is so you don't need to
be concerned about the owner of /var/lib/mailman/archives/private

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200225/ffaf0394/attachment-0001.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 26 09:31:15 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:31:15 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Archives Permission Denied
In-Reply-To: <86a4d9e4-a0f1-e307-ef7b-f6bf588c4a03@msapiro.net>
References: <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <e75b17e2-5eb1-82c1-200a-9d4907ac4cd5@bellsouth.net>
 <837fb77e-4502-7f60-c361-b2a975cd2643@emwd.com>
 <150a9bc8-7fbb-af07-4bd7-0d05e7b4113c@msapiro.net>
 <f63b7391-12ad-eabe-92c9-7d3f974b8e51@bellsouth.net>
 <86a4d9e4-a0f1-e307-ef7b-f6bf588c4a03@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <5bd36822-f49a-017e-ad5e-bce5656c1dab@bellsouth.net>

On 2/25/2020 5:11 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/25/20 10:25 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
>> So shouldn't 'check_perms -f' have fixed that?
>
> check_perms is not perfect. See below for more.
>
>
>> This is a server used strictly for mailman. There are only 2 users with
>> access so I am not worried about the caveat in that article. It looks
>> like you are giving me options and I am not sure what to do now?
>
> Either way works, but in your case, I would ensure
> /var/lib/mailman/archives/private is group mailman and mode is 2771.
> With this setting, check_perms will say
>
>> Warning: Private archive directory is other-executable (o+x).
>>          This could allow other users on your system to read private archives.
>>          If you're on a shared multiuser system, you should consult the
>>          installation manual on how to fix this.
> which you can ignore. The reason I suggest this is so you don't need to
> be concerned about the owner of /var/lib/mailman/archives/private
>
>
Got it. Thanks Mark.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200226/b8039b89/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 26 09:56:54 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:56:54 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>

I'm not sure why I am getting these errors but it seems to be associated
with backups. Is there a backup cronjob that didn't run, fail or is
something else wrong? The directories do exist but not the indicated pck
files. TIA

Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No
such file or directory
Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No such
file or directory:
'/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.pck'
Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Traceback (most recent call last):
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
??? msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 154, in dequeue
??? fp = open(filename)
IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
'/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.pck'

Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Skipping and preserving unparseable message:
1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d
Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Traceback (most recent call last):
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
??? msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 158, in dequeue
??? os.rename(filename, backfile)
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory

Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Skipping and preserving unparseable
message: 1582657325.390982+30007f7a3ce65a426ba60c1ab46d996c33d2bb9a
Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14102) Failed to unlink/preserve backup file:
/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.bak
Feb 25 12:02:07 2020 (5128) Failed to unlink/preserve backup file:
/var/spool/mailman/archive/1582657325.390982+30007f7a3ce65a426ba60c1ab46d996c33d2bb9a.bak
Feb 25 12:07:35 2020 (5134) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No such
file or directory:
'/var/spool/mailman/virgin/1582657654.150712+53c19a1ee899509786cc9beb40990d4c631f65d4.pck'
Feb 25 12:07:35 2020 (5134) Traceback (most recent call last):
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
??? msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 154, in dequeue
??? fp = open(filename)
IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
'/var/spool/mailman/virgin/1582657654.150712+53c19a1ee899509786cc9beb40990d4c631f65d4.pck'

Feb 25 12:07:35 2020 (5134) Skipping and preserving unparseable message:
1582657654.150712+53c19a1ee899509786cc9beb40990d4c631f65d4
Feb 25 12:07:35 2020 (14098) Failed to unlink/preserve backup file:
/var/spool/mailman/virgin/1582657654.150712+53c19a1ee899509786cc9beb40990d4c631f65d4.bak
Feb 25 12:29:07 2020 (14099) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No
such file or directory
Feb 25 12:29:07 2020 (14099) Traceback (most recent call last):
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
??? msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 158, in dequeue
??? os.rename(filename, backfile)
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory

Feb 25 12:29:07 2020 (14099) Skipping and preserving unparseable
message: 1582658947.082654+30ee2b8943fe331a15218871760c1c8d3a5d8a90
Feb 25 12:29:07 2020 (5131) Failed to unlink/preserve backup file:
/var/spool/mailman/in/1582658947.082654+30ee2b8943fe331a15218871760c1c8d3a5d8a90.bak
Feb 25 13:04:00 2020 (14099) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No
such file or directory
Feb 25 13:04:00 2020 (14099) Traceback (most recent call last):
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
??? msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 158, in dequeue
??? os.rename(filename, backfile)
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory

Feb 25 13:04:00 2020 (14099) Skipping and preserving unparseable
message: 1582661039.25433+fcd57e8ec68cce26d6ec44748d97987a885b8f3c
Feb 25 13:04:00 2020 (5131) Failed to unlink/preserve backup file:
/var/spool/mailman/in/1582661039.25433+fcd57e8ec68cce26d6ec44748d97987a885b8f3c.bak
Feb 25 13:04:01 2020 (14104) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No
such file or directory:
'/var/spool/mailman/bounces/1582661040.887134+c53e72b90df57867b3447d0e85584d819d2f14b4.pck'
Feb 25 13:04:01 2020 (14104) Traceback (most recent call last):
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
??? msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
? File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 154, in dequeue
??? fp = open(filename)
IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
'/var/spool/mailman/bounces/1582661040.887134+c53e72b90df57867b3447d0e85584d819d2f14b4.pck'

Feb 25 13:04:01 2020 (14104) Skipping and preserving unparseable
message: 1582661040.887134+c53e72b90df57867b3447d0e85584d819d2f14b4
Feb 25 13:04:01 2020 (5129) Failed to unlink/preserve backup file:
/var/spool/mailman/bounces/1582661040.887134+c53e72b90df57867b3447d0e85584d819d2f14b4.bak


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200226/365a405e/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 26 11:09:50 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 08:09:50 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
In-Reply-To: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>

On 2/26/20 6:56 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> I'm not sure why I am getting these errors but it seems to be associated
> with backups. Is there a backup cronjob that didn't run, fail or is
> something else wrong? The directories do exist but not the indicated pck
> files. TIA


I haven't looked at this in full detail, but is there more than one
BounceRunner running processing the same slice. What does

ps -fwwA|grep BounceRunner

give? If there is more than one process showing
"--runner=BounceRunner:0:1" see the article at
<https://wiki.list.org/x/4030715> for advice on completely stopping
Mailman and starting only one instance.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200226/3ca4018f/attachment-0001.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Wed Feb 26 11:18:26 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 11:18:26 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
In-Reply-To: <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
 <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <22ca6466-f779-38d2-0df6-41c5f4e9926c@bellsouth.net>

On 2/26/2020 11:09 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/26/20 6:56 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> I'm not sure why I am getting these errors but it seems to be associated
>> with backups. Is there a backup cronjob that didn't run, fail or is
>> something else wrong? The directories do exist but not the indicated pck
>> files. TIA
>
> I haven't looked at this in full detail, but is there more than one
> BounceRunner running processing the same slice. What does
>
> ps -fwwA|grep BounceRunner
>
> give? If there is more than one process showing
> "--runner=BounceRunner:0:1" see the article at
> <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030715> for advice on completely stopping
> Mailman and starting only one instance.
>

mailman?? 5129? 5125? 0 Feb24 ???????? 00:00:16 /usr/bin/python
/usr/lib/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 -s

I think that means there is only 1 process.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200226/cf716aa9/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 26 21:14:38 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 18:14:38 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
In-Reply-To: <22ca6466-f779-38d2-0df6-41c5f4e9926c@bellsouth.net>
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
 <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>
 <22ca6466-f779-38d2-0df6-41c5f4e9926c@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <9c004dbe-8716-35df-355f-b999e743922f@msapiro.net>

On 2/26/20 8:18 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> 
> mailman?? 5129? 5125? 0 Feb24 ???????? 00:00:16 /usr/bin/python
> /usr/lib/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 -s
> 
> I think that means there is only 1 process.


Yes, but maybe that wasn't the case at the time of those messages. Are
the errors continuing? Also, I indicated BounceRunner as I was looking
at the last messages you posted. There are also ones involving
OutgoingRunner and VirginRunner

Also, there should be files in /var/spool/mailman/bad/ which you may be
able to examine with Mailman's dumpdb which are the unparseable message(s).

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200226/3904cc05/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 27 09:27:06 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 09:27:06 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
In-Reply-To: <9c004dbe-8716-35df-355f-b999e743922f@msapiro.net>
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
 <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>
 <22ca6466-f779-38d2-0df6-41c5f4e9926c@bellsouth.net>
 <9c004dbe-8716-35df-355f-b999e743922f@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <6986a04a-8edf-2335-ec5f-2cd3d5726441@bellsouth.net>

On 2/26/2020 9:14 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/26/20 8:18 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> mailman?? 5129? 5125? 0 Feb24 ???????? 00:00:16 /usr/bin/python
>> /usr/lib/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 -s
>>
>> I think that means there is only 1 process.
>
> Yes, but maybe that wasn't the case at the time of those messages. Are
> the errors continuing? Also, I indicated BounceRunner as I was looking
> at the last messages you posted. There are also ones involving
> OutgoingRunner and VirginRunner
>
> Also, there should be files in /var/spool/mailman/bad/ which you may be
> able to examine with Mailman's dumpdb which are the unparseable message(s).
>
>
Hi Mark,

It has not happened in 2 days however, there are no files in any of
those directories. Does that not imply the backups are not working? Is
that handled by a cronjob?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/6d62d7f6/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 27 10:22:10 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:22:10 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>

I think this may have been addressed but I can't find it. Now that I am
munging the from address to mitigate DMARC, recipients can no longer
tell who the message is from. What are other folks doing to handle that?
Other than having list members add their own signature? Thanks.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/8ea07545/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 12:47:59 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 09:47:59 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
In-Reply-To: <6986a04a-8edf-2335-ec5f-2cd3d5726441@bellsouth.net>
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
 <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>
 <22ca6466-f779-38d2-0df6-41c5f4e9926c@bellsouth.net>
 <9c004dbe-8716-35df-355f-b999e743922f@msapiro.net>
 <6986a04a-8edf-2335-ec5f-2cd3d5726441@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <536b6e92-8071-0905-ed2d-1cf5059753ce@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 6:27 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> 
> It has not happened in 2 days however, there are no files in any of
> those directories. Does that not imply the backups are not working? Is
> that handled by a cronjob?


This has nothing to do with backups per se. The error messages are
somewhat different.

> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No
> such file or directory

The above actually goes with a set below (pid 14100).


> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No such
> file or directory:
> '/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.pck'
> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
>     msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 154, in dequeue
>     fp = open(filename)
> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
> '/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.pck'


The above says OutgoingRunner has listed its queue and is now trying to
retrieve the indicated .pck file from the queue, but it is gone. The
only way this can happen is if another instance of OutgoingRunner has
retrieved the message in the mean time.


> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Skipping and preserving unparseable message:
> 1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d

This goes with the above, but is spurious. The missing file exception is
assumed to be an unparseable message, but it's not.


> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
>     msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 158, in dequeue
>     os.rename(filename, backfile)
> OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory
> 
> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Skipping and preserving unparseable
> message: 1582657325.390982+30007f7a3ce65a426ba60c1ab46d996c33d2bb9a


Here again, we are trying to retrieve a queued message that another
instance has already retrieved.

The rest of the messages are similar.

As best as I can tell, this is all due to the issue discussed at
<https://wiki.list.org/x/4030715>. If the server has been rebooted since
this happened, that would have fixed it.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/2048063b/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 12:58:34 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 09:58:34 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 7:22 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> I think this may have been addressed but I can't find it. Now that I am
> munging the from address to mitigate DMARC, recipients can no longer
> tell who the message is from. What are other folks doing to handle that?
> Other than having list members add their own signature? Thanks.


The From: header in the munged message contains the sender's display
name as in

From: Jane Doe via ListName <listname at example.com>

and depending on list settings the original From: is in either Reply-To:
or Cc:.

If this is not sufficient, perhaps the recipients can use smarter email
clients ;)

Also, if you are Munging the From: on all messages via the from_is_list
setting, it is better to use dmarc_moderation_action for this so only
those From: headers that need it are munged. The only reason to use
from_is_list is if those users whose domains publish DMARC reject or
quarantine policy feel they are singled out and treated as second class
users.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/17d8e05d/attachment.sig>

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 27 13:07:42 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 13:07:42 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Possible Backup Issue
In-Reply-To: <536b6e92-8071-0905-ed2d-1cf5059753ce@msapiro.net>
References: <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <3b1a0c24-804e-84a2-503b-4e987e72681b@bellsouth.net>
 <b77750cf-1d85-bd2d-23cb-2db0a4eae09e@msapiro.net>
 <22ca6466-f779-38d2-0df6-41c5f4e9926c@bellsouth.net>
 <9c004dbe-8716-35df-355f-b999e743922f@msapiro.net>
 <6986a04a-8edf-2335-ec5f-2cd3d5726441@bellsouth.net>
 <536b6e92-8071-0905-ed2d-1cf5059753ce@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <758e087c-4d2d-5537-975f-a6b4278d177f@bellsouth.net>

On 2/27/2020 12:47 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 6:27 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> It has not happened in 2 days however, there are no files in any of
>> those directories. Does that not imply the backups are not working? Is
>> that handled by a cronjob?
>
> This has nothing to do with backups per se. The error messages are
> somewhat different.
>
>> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No
>> such file or directory
> The above actually goes with a set below (pid 14100).
>
>
>> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Uncaught runner exception: [Errno 2] No such
>> file or directory:
>> '/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.pck'
>> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Traceback (most recent call last):
>>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
>>     msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 154, in dequeue
>>     fp = open(filename)
>> IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
>> '/var/spool/mailman/out/1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d.pck'
>
> The above says OutgoingRunner has listed its queue and is now trying to
> retrieve the indicated .pck file from the queue, but it is gone. The
> only way this can happen is if another instance of OutgoingRunner has
> retrieved the message in the mean time.
>
>
>> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (5133) Skipping and preserving unparseable message:
>> 1582657325.390982+504a3666a91ef8722e1af700669bf0190e00417d
> This goes with the above, but is spurious. The missing file exception is
> assumed to be an unparseable message, but it's not.
>
>
>> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Traceback (most recent call last):
>>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 99, in _oneloop
>>     msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>>   File "/usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 158, in dequeue
>>     os.rename(filename, backfile)
>> OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory
>>
>> Feb 25 12:02:06 2020 (14100) Skipping and preserving unparseable
>> message: 1582657325.390982+30007f7a3ce65a426ba60c1ab46d996c33d2bb9a
>
> Here again, we are trying to retrieve a queued message that another
> instance has already retrieved.
>
> The rest of the messages are similar.
>
> As best as I can tell, this is all due to the issue discussed at
> <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030715>. If the server has been rebooted since
> this happened, that would have fixed it.
>
>
Hi Mark,

Thanks. I'll just keep an eye on it to see if it recurs.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/4996fefc/attachment-0001.sig>

From jimpop at domainmail.org  Thu Feb 27 13:05:36 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 13:05:36 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>

On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 09:58 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 7:22 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> > I think this may have been addressed but I can't find it. Now that I am
> > munging the from address to mitigate DMARC, recipients can no longer
> > tell who the message is from. What are other folks doing to handle that?
> > Other than having list members add their own signature? Thanks.
> 
> The From: header in the munged message contains the sender's display
> name as in
> 
> From: Jane Doe via ListName <listname at example.com>


I've been wondering if we should change that to something like this:

 From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain.tld) via Listname
<listname at example.com>


This would be better for mobile email clients which can't/don't easily
display reply-to or other headers.

-Jim P.


From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 27 13:17:24 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 13:17:24 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <b7076769-03c2-021f-cf25-fc4002fd6a68@bellsouth.net>

On 2/27/2020 12:58 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 7:22 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> I think this may have been addressed but I can't find it. Now that I am
>> munging the from address to mitigate DMARC, recipients can no longer
>> tell who the message is from. What are other folks doing to handle that?
>> Other than having list members add their own signature? Thanks.
>
> The From: header in the munged message contains the sender's display
> name as in
>
> From: Jane Doe via ListName <listname at example.com>
>
> and depending on list settings the original From: is in either Reply-To:
> or Cc:.
>
> If this is not sufficient, perhaps the recipients can use smarter email
> clients ;)
>
> Also, if you are Munging the From: on all messages via the from_is_list
> setting, it is better to use dmarc_moderation_action for this so only
> those From: headers that need it are munged. The only reason to use
> from_is_list is if those users whose domains publish DMARC reject or
> quarantine policy feel they are singled out and treated as second class
> users.
>
>
Hi Mark,

Thanks for the reply. I am not seeing that. The From: looks like this:

From: Rushtalk Discussion List via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>

In "General Options" for that list I set the item "Replace the From:
header address with the list's posting address to mitigate issues
stemming from the original From: domain's DMARC or similar policies."
with "Munge From." Did I set the wrong thing?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/f0203841/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 13:23:47 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:23:47 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
Message-ID: <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 10:05 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> I've been wondering if we should change that to something like this:
> 
>  From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain.tld) via Listname
> <listname at example.com>


We specifically do not do that because it is said that multiple email
addresses in From: trigger spam filters.

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

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 27 13:27:41 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 13:27:41 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>

On 2/27/2020 1:23 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 10:05 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
>> I've been wondering if we should change that to something like this:
>>
>>  From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain.tld) via Listname
>> <listname at example.com>
>
> We specifically do not do that because it is said that multiple email
> addresses in From: trigger spam filters.
>

From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain.tld) via Listname
<listname at example.com>


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/7091e76a/attachment-0001.sig>

From jimpop at domainmail.org  Thu Feb 27 13:27:50 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 13:27:50 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <fb8df3c32eabdd0866c2e02a20022491f44a87f7.camel@domainmail.org>

On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 10:23 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 10:05 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> > I've been wondering if we should change that to something like this:
> > 
> >  From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain.tld) via Listname
> > <listname at example.com>
> 
> We specifically do not do that because it is said that multiple email
> addresses in From: trigger spam filters.
> 

Sorry, I meant this:

From: Jane Doe (jane.doe#domain.tld) via Listname <listname at example.com>
 


-Jim P.


From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 13:38:30 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:38:30 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <b7076769-03c2-021f-cf25-fc4002fd6a68@bellsouth.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <b7076769-03c2-021f-cf25-fc4002fd6a68@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <a3007bd3-4d8d-127d-b511-ec4e079e2813@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 10:17 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the reply. I am not seeing that. The From: looks like this:
> 
> From: Rushtalk Discussion List via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>


That must be a RedHat thing having to do with their backport of DMARC
mitigations. If you don't like it, install from source.


> In "General Options" for that list I set the item "Replace the From:
> header address with the list's posting address to mitigate issues
> stemming from the original From: domain's DMARC or similar policies."
> with "Munge From." Did I set the wrong thing?


That will apply From: munging to all posts. I have no idea what the
RedHat package does, but if in Privacy options... -> Sender filters you
have dmarc_moderation_action and dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action set
General Options -> from_is_list to No and set dmarc_moderation_action to
Munge From and dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action to Yes and if you have
it, dmarc_none_moderation_action to No.

This will apply From: munging only to those messages From: a domain that
publishes DMARC policy = reject or quarantine.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/be446a46/attachment.sig>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 13:56:23 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 10:56:23 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 10:27 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> 
> From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain.tld) via Listname
> <listname at example.com>

On 2/27/20 10:27 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
>
> Sorry, I meant this:
> 
> From: Jane Doe (jane.doe#domain.tld) via Listname <listname at example.com>

Both of those still have the domain which is also considered problematic

We could consider

From: Jane Doe (jane.doe at domain dot tld) via Listname
<listname at example.com>

for Mailman 3, but that seems unduly kludgy. There won't be any change
in Mailman 2.1 which is only waiting for i18n updates for the final
2.1.30 release which will be the last release from the GNU Mailman project.

The point is that we (apparently not RedHat's backport, but upstream)
already include the sender's display name and we try very hard to ensure
that compliant MUAs produce the same result for 'reply', 'reply-all' and
'reply-list' whether or not the From: is munged. I think that should be
sufficient.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/19a8d5e6/attachment.sig>

From jimpop at domainmail.org  Thu Feb 27 14:24:12 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:24:12 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project (was:
 Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>

On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 10:56 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> for Mailman 3, but that seems unduly kludgy. There won't be any change
> in Mailman 2.1 which is only waiting for i18n updates for the final
> 2.1.30 release which will be the last release from the GNU Mailman project.

Who decides that there will be no more releases of MM2 from the GNU
Mailman project?  

I've got to be honest, Mailman 3 still looks unstable to me.  I get that
it's working on python.org where there are people working on it day
after day, but surely you realize there are a ton of Mailman2 sites that
don't have the time to develop and maintain their own install day after
day.  Look at the MM3 list, there are people who do nothing but offer
full time Mailman hosting and they have problem after problem.  And then
there's the whole "I don't need a CMS for a MLM" argument.  I personally
believe there's a lot more life left in MM2 than a few people want to
admit. 

OK, there's the Python2 EOL issue, but python2 isn't disappearing
overnight, certainly not this month or next (as you say the case should
be with MM2).  

I guess I'm just still a bit shocked to see you rush to abandon
something so popular and established.

Personally, I'd like to see the GNU Mailman project have a formal
Mailman 2.3 release that supports Python3, I feel that there would be a
lot of support for that.

-Jim P.




From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 14:44:33 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:44:33 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
Message-ID: <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 11:24 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> Who decides that there will be no more releases of MM2 from the GNU
> Mailman project?  


I do. I am the release manager and the only one making releases so I get
to decide.


> I've got to be honest, Mailman 3 still looks unstable to me.  I get that
> it's working on python.org where there are people working on it day
> after day, but surely you realize there are a ton of Mailman2 sites that
> don't have the time to develop and maintain their own install day after
> day.  Look at the MM3 list, there are people who do nothing but offer
> full time Mailman hosting and they have problem after problem.  And then
> there's the whole "I don't need a CMS for a MLM" argument.  I personally
> believe there's a lot more life left in MM2 than a few people want to
> admit. 


That's all well and good, but MM 2.1 is stable product that works. Why
does it need added/changed features at this point?


> OK, there's the Python2 EOL issue, but python2 isn't disappearing
> overnight, certainly not this month or next (as you say the case should
> be with MM2).  


Where do you get the idea that I said MM 2 will be disappearing? I never
said that. I just said there will be no further releases after 2.1.30.

This list will not go away, and I will not stop reading/responding until
the need for that goes away assuming I live that long


> I guess I'm just still a bit shocked to see you rush to abandon
> something so popular and established.


I'm not rushing to abandon anything. I'm just saying don't expect
Mailman 2.1.31 from the GNU Mailman project.


> Personally, I'd like to see the GNU Mailman project have a formal
> Mailman 2.3 release that supports Python3, I feel that there would be a
> lot of support for that.


If you want to port Mailman 2 to Python 3, you are welcome to do it. I
have said before that a much better use of time and resources would be
the implementation of a light weight, non-Django web UI for Mailman 3,
but I don't see anyone raising a hand to do either.


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

From dap1 at bellsouth.net  Thu Feb 27 14:54:33 2020
From: dap1 at bellsouth.net (Dennis Putnam)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:54:33 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <a3007bd3-4d8d-127d-b511-ec4e079e2813@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <b7076769-03c2-021f-cf25-fc4002fd6a68@bellsouth.net>
 <a3007bd3-4d8d-127d-b511-ec4e079e2813@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <09056c14-ff55-a7d5-7a89-281b92ab6b9f@bellsouth.net>

On 2/27/2020 1:38 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 10:17 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply. I am not seeing that. The From: looks like this:
>>
>> From: Rushtalk Discussion List via Rushtalk <rushtalk at csdco.com>
>
> That must be a RedHat thing having to do with their backport of DMARC
> mitigations. If you don't like it, install from source.
>
>
>> In "General Options" for that list I set the item "Replace the From:
>> header address with the list's posting address to mitigate issues
>> stemming from the original From: domain's DMARC or similar policies."
>> with "Munge From." Did I set the wrong thing?

>
> That will apply From: munging to all posts. I have no idea what the
> RedHat package does, but if in Privacy options... -> Sender filters you
> have dmarc_moderation_action and dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action set
> General Options -> from_is_list to No and set dmarc_moderation_action to
> Munge From and dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action to Yes and if you have
> it, dmarc_none_moderation_action to No.
>
> This will apply From: munging only to those messages From: a domain that
> publishes DMARC policy = reject or quarantine.
>
>
Hi Mark,

I didn't realize that there were OS dependencies in the DMARC
mitigation. I thought it was all within the mailman code.

In any case I'll look through those options and see what they do in
RHEL. Thanks.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/503774a5/attachment.sig>

From mailmanu-20190215 at billmail.scconsult.com  Thu Feb 27 14:51:44 2020
From: mailmanu-20190215 at billmail.scconsult.com (Bill Cole)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:51:44 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
Message-ID: <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>

On 27 Feb 2020, at 14:24, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:

> Personally, I'd like to see the GNU Mailman project have a formal
> Mailman 2.3 release that supports Python3, I feel that there would be 
> a
> lot of support for that.

I'm sure there would be widespread applause and congratulations if such 
a thing were actually released. That sort of "support" is unhelpful 
towards actually making such a release.

The needed support is the actual skilled effort of writing the required 
Python3 code. I don't have the time to hunt down the specific 
statements, but I have vague recollections that both Barry and Mark have 
said repeatedly that doing so would be substantially more effort than 
they are willing to put into anything built on the MM2 architecture.


-- 
Bill Cole
bill at scconsult.com or billcole at apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not Currently Available For Hire

From phils at caerllewys.net  Thu Feb 27 15:08:14 2020
From: phils at caerllewys.net (Phil Stracchino)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:08:14 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
Message-ID: <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>

On 2020-02-27 14:51, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2020, at 14:24, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
>> Personally, I'd like to see the GNU Mailman project have a formal
>> Mailman 2.3 release that supports Python3, I feel that there would be 
>> a
>> lot of support for that.
> 
> I'm sure there would be widespread applause and congratulations if such 
> a thing were actually released. That sort of "support" is unhelpful 
> towards actually making such a release.
> 
> The needed support is the actual skilled effort of writing the required 
> Python3 code. I don't have the time to hunt down the specific 
> statements, but I have vague recollections that both Barry and Mark have 
> said repeatedly that doing so would be substantially more effort than 
> they are willing to put into anything built on the MM2 architecture.

Rewriting without breaking is hard.

There is a Python framework called Twisted.  It has a lot of useful
features.  Also a lot of vices, but a lot of useful features.  As best I
can determine, the task of updating it to be Python 3 compatible has now
been under way for ten years (with most of that time, only one person
working on it).

What has this yielded?

"Most of the most commonly used parts" of Twisted are now Python 3
compatible.



-- 
  Phil Stracchino
  Babylon Communications
  phils at caerllewys.net
  phil at co.ordinate.org
  Landline: +1.603.293.8485
  Mobile:   +1.603.998.6958

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 15:27:26 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 12:27:26 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Handling Munged From Addresses
In-Reply-To: <09056c14-ff55-a7d5-7a89-281b92ab6b9f@bellsouth.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <b7076769-03c2-021f-cf25-fc4002fd6a68@bellsouth.net>
 <a3007bd3-4d8d-127d-b511-ec4e079e2813@msapiro.net>
 <09056c14-ff55-a7d5-7a89-281b92ab6b9f@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <b12f81cd-5339-9212-1cdc-3f82d39868db@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 11:54 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> 
> I didn't realize that there were OS dependencies in the DMARC
> mitigation. I thought it was all within the mailman code.


It's not an OS dependency. It's a downstream package dependency. If I
look at <https://rpms.remirepo.net/rpmphp/zoom.php?rpm=mailman>, The
newest RHEL/Centos RPM is 2.1.15-26.el7_4.1. Any DMARC mitigations in
this package were backported by RedHat as there were no DMARC
mitigations upstream before 2.1.16.

There does appear to be an EL-8 rpm at
<http://vault.centos.org/8.0.1905/AppStream/Source/SPackages/mailman-2.1.29-4.module_el8.0.0+34+0459d3d0.src.rpm>.
You might consider trying that.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/532c33d4/attachment.sig>

From dmaziuk at bmrb.wisc.edu  Thu Feb 27 15:25:27 2020
From: dmaziuk at bmrb.wisc.edu (Dimitri Maziuk)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:25:27 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
 <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>
Message-ID: <9d097726-0419-7f8d-211a-a00a0846244c@bmrb.wisc.edu>

On 2/27/20 2:08 PM, Phil Stracchino wrote:
...
> What has this yielded?
> 
> "Most of the most commonly used parts" of Twisted are now Python 3
> compatible.

I hear this how upgrading any django installation from one python-3
version to another python-3 version usually goes. I.e. long-term, at
this point we're still better off porting MM2 than switching to MM3.

Not sure why, though: Jan 2020 has come and gone and all my python-2
scripts are still working. Amazingly enough.

-- 
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20200227/02ce4ea3/attachment.sig>

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Thu Feb 27 15:40:53 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:40:53 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <3e253f64-bc5a-ab2c-ca0a-188a040045bb@emwd.com>

On 2/27/20 2:44 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> If you want to port Mailman 2 to Python 3, you are welcome to do it. I
> have said before that a much better use of time and resources would be
> the implementation of a light weight, non-Django web UI for Mailman 3,
> but I don't see anyone raising a hand to do either.

I am doing that. I have hired a programmer and work beings for a new 
Mailman 3 UI next week.

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/


From mcguire at neurotica.com  Thu Feb 27 15:54:01 2020
From: mcguire at neurotica.com (Dave McGuire)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:54:01 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <3e253f64-bc5a-ab2c-ca0a-188a040045bb@emwd.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <3e253f64-bc5a-ab2c-ca0a-188a040045bb@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <64068a81-18bf-447f-ad0d-718f7587b171@neurotica.com>

On 2/27/20 3:40 PM, Brian Carpenter wrote:
>> If you want to port Mailman 2 to Python 3, you are welcome to do it. I
>> have said before that a much better use of time and resources would be
>> the implementation of a light weight, non-Django web UI for Mailman 3,
>> but I don't see anyone raising a hand to do either.
> 
> I am doing that. I have hired a programmer and work beings for a new
> Mailman 3 UI next week.

  Whoa, wow...does this mean (when it's ready) that we'll be able to
dump the steaming pile that is django??

            -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Thu Feb 27 16:37:35 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:37:35 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>

On 2/27/20 2:44 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> I
> have said before that a much better use of time and resources would be
> the implementation of a light weight, non-Django web UI for Mailman 3,
> but I don't see anyone raising a hand to do either.

Let me be more clearer on this.

I have hired a professional PHP developer to begin work on a new 
admin/forum interface for Mailman 3. The work begins next week. We are 
only focusing on the admin (Postorius) interface initially. I also am in 
the process of hiring a front end developer for the new interfaces. I 
believe in the Mailman project, and as someone who has benefited from 
offering Mailman hosting services for years, I don't want to see it go 
away. The problems however are this:

1. Mailman 2 is great. The interface for it is very outdated. This turns 
people off. UI design has come a long way and people are use to using 
modern UIs.

2. Mailman 2 does need to be ported to python 3 eventually but Mailman 3 
is already there so why spend extra time and resources on doing that? 
That is a good question and the answer may be to look at the way Mailman 
3 development is currently being handled. Also Mark Sapiro clearly wants 
us to put our support behind Mailman 3 which is good and he has my 
support with that.

3. Mailman 2 doesn't integrate well with other applications due to no 
REST api which I think is what modern users want these days. Mailman 3 
has a REST api which is great but again I am having issues with the way 
Mailman 3 is being developed.

4. So lovers/users of Mailman are stuck between a rock and hard place: 
Mailman 2 or Mailman 3? Which way to go?

For me, Mailman 3 is the way to go but I can no longer wait on the two 
interfaces of Mailman 3 to be brought to modern standards. 
Postorius/Hyperkitty came out flawed right from the beginning:

1. Outdated U.I.

2. All of Mailman Core features/functions not being revealed in 
Postorius. This is something I intend to fix quickly with the new U.I. 
as soon as I figure out what those features/functions are. Anyone want 
to provide a list of that to me off-list so I can pass it on to my 
programmer?

3. The decision to use Django. Maybe great for Python users but not for 
me and perhaps for others. This is also brings additional confusion. 
Mailman 3 has THREE interfaces: Postorius, Hyperkitty, and the Django 
admin interface.

4. Very poor documentation for Mailman 3 and way too many methods of 
installing it which means all kinds of versions of Mailman 3 are in 
production today because Mailman versions are dependent upon what method 
of installation a person chooses: Distro Package, Docker, Source, others?

5. MM3 DMARC handling seems to have improved from reviews I have seen 
but NO BOUNCE PROCESSING. My goodness. How do list managers keep their 
mailing lists clean? I know how much a hit to an IP address reputation 
can be done when a server is sending messages out to invalid email 
addresses. However I don't think I can fix that right? It is a Mailman 
core issue? So let's say it does get added to MM Core. How long will it 
show up in Postorius? Especially since not every feature in MM Core is 
revealed in Postorius already.

6. Social Media integration via Django is awful.

7. Hyperkitty just does not cut it in appearance and usability when it 
comes to a modern list forum. I am simply unable to compete with the 
growing number of applications that are being offered that has a better 
browser UI for communicating with list members.

I think the highest priority is to get Mailman 3 core up to speed in 
offering everything that Mailman 2 offers such as bounce processing. 
Then perhaps a whole new approach to interfacing with Mailman 3 core is 
in order. That part I have decided to work on because no matter how 
great MM3 core is, if the interfaces are poor then modern users will 
move on to something else.

I hope I did not offend anyone here or show disrespect to the hours and 
hours that have been spent on the Mailman 3 project. That was never my 
intention and I love Mailman and its community of users.

I would be interested to know if the developers of Mailman 3 are 
interested in the initiative I have taken to develop new interfaces for 
Mailman 3 that are more modernized and user-friendly.

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/


From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 17:30:16 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:30:16 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 1:37 PM, Brian Carpenter wrote:

Brian makes a number of good points. I just have a couple of
remarks/questions.


> 5. MM3 DMARC handling seems to have improved from reviews I have seen
> but NO BOUNCE PROCESSING.

I don't know why Mailman 3's DMARC mitigation is considered improved
over Mailman 2.1. It's the same. The Settings and Postorius UI for them
are more logical than MM 2.1, but they ultimately boil down to the same
things.

The latest Mailman core (not yet released but available at
<https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/tree/master> fully implements
bounce processing. Prior to this, bounce events were stored in the
database but not processed. Now they are.


> My goodness. How do list managers keep their
> mailing lists clean? I know how much a hit to an IP address reputation
> can be done when a server is sending messages out to invalid email
> addresses. However I don't think I can fix that right? It is a Mailman
> core issue? So let's say it does get added to MM Core. How long will it
> show up in Postorius? Especially since not every feature in MM Core is
> revealed in Postorius already.


As I said, it's in the latest version of core. The list specific
settings: 'bounce_info_stale_after', 'bounce_notify_owner_on_disable',
'bounce_notify_owner_on_removal', 'bounce_score_threshold',
'bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings',
'bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval' and 'process_bounces' are
not currently exposed in Postorius, but if Mailman 2.1 lists are
imported with import21, they will be set appropriately and they will be
in Postorius eventually.

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

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Thu Feb 27 18:09:26 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 18:09:26 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>

On 2/27/20 5:30 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> I don't know why Mailman 3's DMARC mitigation is considered improved
> over Mailman 2.1. It's the same. The Settings and Postorius UI for them
> are more logical than MM 2.1, but they ultimately boil down to the same
> things.
>
> The latest Mailman core (not yet released but available at
> <https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/tree/master>  fully implements
> bounce processing. Prior to this, bounce events were stored in the
> database but not processed. Now they are.
> As I said, it's in the latest version of core. The list specific
> settings: 'bounce_info_stale_after', 'bounce_notify_owner_on_disable',
> 'bounce_notify_owner_on_removal', 'bounce_score_threshold',
> 'bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings',
> 'bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval' and 'process_bounces' are
> not currently exposed in Postorius, but if Mailman 2.1 lists are
> imported with import21, they will be set appropriately and they will be
> in Postorius eventually.

I don't speak from experience in regards to my comment made on DMARC 
mitigation. It was based on observing comments that have been made.

Bounce processing will still not be available for new users of Mailman 
which is my big concern. I assume new lists will have to have those 
settings adjusted via the Mailman shell?

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/


From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 20:01:11 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 17:01:11 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 3:09 PM, Brian Carpenter wrote:
> 
> Bounce processing will still not be available for new users of Mailman
> which is my big concern. I assume new lists will have to have those
> settings adjusted via the Mailman shell?


Sure it will. All the settings have reasonable defaults just like MM 2.1

bounce_info_stale_after: 7d
bounce_notify_owner_on_disable: True
bounce_notify_owner_on_removal: True
bounce_score_threshold: 5
bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings: 3
bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval: 7d
process_bounces: True

True, until they are exposed in some list admin UI they will need to be
set via mailman shell or the REST API, but bounce processing will work
out of the box in Mailman core 3.3.1.

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

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 20:03:53 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 17:03:53 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
 <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <0e248c19-edff-851d-105c-3368928121ec@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 5:01 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> 
> True, until they are exposed in some list admin UI they will need to be
> set via mailman shell or the REST API, ...

That is IF they need to be changed from the default.

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

From mcguire at neurotica.com  Thu Feb 27 20:44:48 2020
From: mcguire at neurotica.com (Dave McGuire)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 20:44:48 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
 <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <199a11e3-350d-3b0d-120d-72a39aea5eef@neurotica.com>

On 2/27/20 8:01 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>> Bounce processing will still not be available for new users of Mailman
>> which is my big concern. I assume new lists will have to have those
>> settings adjusted via the Mailman shell?
> 
> Sure it will. All the settings have reasonable defaults just like MM 2.1
> 
> bounce_info_stale_after: 7d
> bounce_notify_owner_on_disable: True
> bounce_notify_owner_on_removal: True
> bounce_score_threshold: 5
> bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings: 3
> bounce_you_are_disabled_warnings_interval: 7d
> process_bounces: True
> 
> True, until they are exposed in some list admin UI they will need to be
> set via mailman shell or the REST API, but bounce processing will work
> out of the box in Mailman core 3.3.1.

  Not to hijack, but is it possible to set the maximum message size by
the mailman shell?  I've a problem with that in one of my MM3 lists, I
really need to set that, but the web interface does not allow me to set
it.  I get the dreaded "Unknown attribute: max_message_size" error.
Could you loan me a clue?

                Thanks,
                -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 21:08:50 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 18:08:50 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Setting MM 3 attributes
In-Reply-To: <199a11e3-350d-3b0d-120d-72a39aea5eef@neurotica.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
 <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
 <199a11e3-350d-3b0d-120d-72a39aea5eef@neurotica.com>
Message-ID: <b207f8ff-e6cd-1b5f-5b2f-1666e0ea2432@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 5:44 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
> 
>   Not to hijack, but is it possible to set the maximum message size by
> the mailman shell?  I've a problem with that in one of my MM3 lists, I
> really need to set that, but the web interface does not allow me to set
> it.  I get the dreaded "Unknown attribute: max_message_size" error.
> Could you loan me a clue?

Not only does this not really belong in this thread, it doesn't even
belong on this list.
<https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users at mailman3.org/>
would be a better place, but since you asked...

Setting Maximum message size works in current Postorius. What version do
you have?

Yes you can set it in mailman shell

mailman shell -l list at example.com

The variable 'm' is the list at example.com mailing list
>>> m.max_message_size = 100    (or whatever you want to set it to)
>>> commit()
>>>



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

From mcguire at neurotica.com  Thu Feb 27 21:21:30 2020
From: mcguire at neurotica.com (Dave McGuire)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 21:21:30 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Setting MM 3 attributes
In-Reply-To: <b207f8ff-e6cd-1b5f-5b2f-1666e0ea2432@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
 <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
 <199a11e3-350d-3b0d-120d-72a39aea5eef@neurotica.com>
 <b207f8ff-e6cd-1b5f-5b2f-1666e0ea2432@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <be3a4fad-869f-7643-6055-c14d194cc757@neurotica.com>

On 2/27/20 9:08 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/27/20 5:44 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
>>
>>   Not to hijack, but is it possible to set the maximum message size by
>> the mailman shell?  I've a problem with that in one of my MM3 lists, I
>> really need to set that, but the web interface does not allow me to set
>> it.  I get the dreaded "Unknown attribute: max_message_size" error.
>> Could you loan me a clue?
> 
> Not only does this not really belong in this thread, it doesn't even
> belong on this list.> <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users at mailman3.org/>
> would be a better place, but since you asked...

  Yeah, I figured, sorry about that Mark.

> Setting Maximum message size works in current Postorius. What version do
> you have?

  I'm running 1.1.2; it's from the Ubuntu repo.

> Yes you can set it in mailman shell
> 
> mailman shell -l list at example.com
> 
> The variable 'm' is the list at example.com mailing list
>>>> m.max_message_size = 100    (or whatever you want to set it to)
>>>> commit()
>>>>

  I've made a note of it, and will give it a shot tomorrow.  Thanks, and
I'm sorry for the OT post!

              -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 27 22:18:21 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 19:18:21 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Setting MM 3 attributes
In-Reply-To: <be3a4fad-869f-7643-6055-c14d194cc757@neurotica.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
 <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
 <199a11e3-350d-3b0d-120d-72a39aea5eef@neurotica.com>
 <b207f8ff-e6cd-1b5f-5b2f-1666e0ea2432@msapiro.net>
 <be3a4fad-869f-7643-6055-c14d194cc757@neurotica.com>
Message-ID: <e2c4254d-2593-7ab2-570d-e8cb6b189f21@msapiro.net>

On 2/27/20 6:21 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
> 
>> Setting Maximum message size works in current Postorius. What version do
>> you have?
> 
>   I'm running 1.1.2; it's from the Ubuntu repo.

Actually, the issue is Mailman core, not Postorius. max_message_size was
not exposed in REST before version 3.2.0.

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

From mcguire at neurotica.com  Thu Feb 27 23:37:29 2020
From: mcguire at neurotica.com (Dave McGuire)
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 23:37:29 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Setting MM 3 attributes
In-Reply-To: <e2c4254d-2593-7ab2-570d-e8cb6b189f21@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <1155457a-2541-ac3b-12b6-c5367c1b13ce@msapiro.net>
 <6b18e4b3-7822-1dc8-8a39-952a20ef2923@emwd.com>
 <e1da76de-142a-b0fe-3c35-d3e7d75d4200@msapiro.net>
 <199a11e3-350d-3b0d-120d-72a39aea5eef@neurotica.com>
 <b207f8ff-e6cd-1b5f-5b2f-1666e0ea2432@msapiro.net>
 <be3a4fad-869f-7643-6055-c14d194cc757@neurotica.com>
 <e2c4254d-2593-7ab2-570d-e8cb6b189f21@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <a08d5522-ef7f-b2c8-935b-2bfe05631437@neurotica.com>

On 2/27/20 10:18 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>> Setting Maximum message size works in current Postorius. What version do
>>> you have?
>>
>>   I'm running 1.1.2; it's from the Ubuntu repo.
> 
> Actually, the issue is Mailman core, not Postorius. max_message_size was
> not exposed in REST before version 3.2.0.

  Ahh I see.

  I sure wish the distribution packagers would do a better job of
keeping up with new releases.  I'm an old-school UNIX guy, very much
accustomed to building everything from source (under SunOS, Ultrix, etc)
and I still maintain that these package management systems create more
problems than they solve. ;)

  I got motivated and tried setting that variable via the mailman shell,
and it worked a treat.  Thanks again for hitting me with the clue bat.

             -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Fri Feb 28 05:44:38 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:44:38 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
 <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>
Message-ID: <24152.61206.528428.608731@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Phil Stracchino writes:

 > Rewriting without breaking is hard.

True.

 > There is a Python framework called Twisted.

Not an example appropriate to Mailman, though.  The Twisted people were
doing amazing things with str, to which Unicode was irrelevant, because
their job was to shovel bytes from here to there correctly but as fast
as possible.  (Mercurial has a similar story, and a similar visceral
hatred for Python 3.)

Mailman has the opposite problem.  We *wish* str was Unicode from the
get-go, but it wasn't, and Mailman 2 is rife with potential encoded/
decoded confusion because of the nature of email and the dual usage of
str in Python 1, and the history of Mailman as an MLM for an American
rock band (who needs no steekin' accents, we just hammer and bend the
strings!)  There are two decades of hacks and patches in Mailman 2 to
catch the squirmers that somehow manage to be str where unicode is
needed or vice versa, and every single one of those would need to be
reverse engineered in a Python 3 environment.  Not a job I would want
to do: like Barry, I would rewrite from scratch (and probably redesign
as well).  But every part converted would be a joy to work with in
the future.

 > As best I can determine, the task of updating it to be Python 3
 > compatible has now been under way for ten years (with most of that
 > time, only one person working on it).

But that's because Python 3 deliberately encouraged decoding streams
of bytes, by making it hard to process bytes the same way as str in
Python 2.  It wouldn't have been hard to make the bytes type identical
to str except for the internal representation, so that programs like
Twisted and Mercurial would just need to be converted so that
*everything* was bytes except for the error messages.  But that was
deliberately avoided: a lot of (Python 2) str methods were not
inherited by bytes.  (In fact, some were re-added later, but too late
to make the bit-shovelers happy.)  So the Twisted people hated Python
3 with a passion.

I'm not surprised that only one person would work on the port, I'm
surprised they found even one!

Steve

From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Fri Feb 28 05:52:40 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:52:40 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Brian Carpenter writes:

 > I have hired a professional PHP developer to begin work on a new 
 > admin/forum interface for Mailman 3.

Too bad.  I really sympathize with your goals but am unlikely to be
able to contribute directly to implementation (assuming an eventual
open-sourcing).  Never learned PHP, not going to do it anytime soon.
That's OK, the point of REST is so *you* *can* do that.  I can only
speak for myself, but we can help to some extent on the Python side of
the REST interface.

A word of advice: we, too, talked about "modern forum software and
interfaces that users expect", but implementing them well is a lot
harder than we expected.  I'm not saying it's too hard for your
developer, but stay on top of that project!  Mail is hard to combine
with forums, and it's easy to stray into the weeds.

 > 2. Mailman 2 does need to be ported to python 3 eventually

Sure, but that's still quite a ways away.  The main issues I can see
would be related to TLS, where old versions of the protocol seem to be
deprecated more and more rapidly, but it's probably easier to patch
Python 2 for that than to port Mailman 2 to Python 3.  Sure, there may
be non-TLS CVEs against Python 2, but I really can't see them being as
serious as the kinds of issues that Mailman 2 itself, not to mention
any site with mail service, would have.

 > 3. The decision to use Django. Maybe great for Python users

This makes no sense to me.  If your problem with Django is that it's
written in Python, you've got the REST interface.  That's as far as
our responsibility goes.  See "REST is the approach" below.

 > 4. [W]ay too many methods of installing it which means all kinds of
 > versions of Mailman 3 are in production today because Mailman
 > versions are dependent upon what method of installation a person
 > chooses: Distro Package, Docker, Source, others?

That's not a problem we created.  Our recommendation is, as it always
has been, build from source.  And the problem is not going to go away.
Users want turnkey packages such as containers, distros can't be
stopped from building distro packages.  If you open source your
interfaces, you'll run into the same issues.

 > I think the highest priority is to get Mailman 3 core up to speed
 > in offering everything that Mailman 2 offers such as bounce
 > processing.

Agreed.  I didn't even know bounce processing wasn't working until
this summer (my production lists are all in-house to personal
acquaintances to same-university addresses -- if mail isn't flowing to
somebody, it's not going to anybody, even Mailman!)

 > Then perhaps a whole new approach to interfacing with Mailman 3
 > core is in order.

REST *is* the "Mailman 3 approach" to interfacing.  Historically, at
the time Mailman 3 core got whipped into shape to start beta testing,
we went with Django for Postorius, because it was the "hot" framework
of the day, and that's what the developers who volunteered wanted to
work with.  Of course it had to be a Python framework since we'd be
maintaining it.  HyperKitty was a little bit different: the Fedora (or
Red Hat?) people wanted Mailman 3 for internal reasons, and they
contributed a pile of labor, and (AFAIK) independently chose Django
and developed the UI based on it (which is why we have two separate
Django configs).

*However*, the original idea was that *we* didn't know much about UI
development, especially the peripheral features of archiving such as
search and access control, and we wanted to encourage third parties to
develop their own, or to integrate Mailman lists into their larger
platforms which already provided user interfaces.

 > I hope I did not offend anyone here

The main Postorius devs aren't hanging out here, and we get only a
little contact in the summer with the HyperKitty devs since the Fedora
support got cut three or four years ago. ;-)  If I know Mark he
started a little miffed but calmed down quickly since diverse UIs have
always been part of the vision.

 > I would be interested to know if the developers of Mailman 3 are
 > interested in the initiative I have taken to develop new interfaces
 > for Mailman 3

As far as I know this is precisely what we wanted to happen in the
first place.  We knew that we would have to have a bundlable
user/admin interface and an archiver with a web interface, but the
original intent was not that they dominate Mailman installations.  We
should have known better, given the huge popularity of Mailman 2 with
Pipermail (oh, Lordy) as the archiver, but hope springs eternal ....

I think further discussion should move to mailman-developers, though,
and please introduce your UI developer(s) to us on mailman-developers
soonish.  Nobody has huge amounts of time to put into work on Mailman
right now AFAIK, but I expect we will be willing to cooperate on any
Mailman features or fixes your developer needs in the REST interface
"in good time".

I'm going to be very busy until March 11, but after that I'll have
some time.  Ginning up a list of REST endpoints is the kind of thing
I'm good at, so maybe I personally could start there.

Steve

From jimpop at domainmail.org  Fri Feb 28 09:17:35 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 09:17:35 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>

On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 19:52 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Brian Carpenter writes:
> 
>  > I have hired a professional PHP developer to begin work on a new 
>  > admin/forum interface for Mailman 3.
> 
> Too bad.  I really sympathize with your goals but am unlikely to be
> able to contribute directly to implementation (assuming an eventual
> open-sourcing).  Never learned PHP, not going to do it anytime soon.

Stephen, It's difficult for me to parse your thought process on this.
Why do you say "Too bad" about someone wanting to improve something that
you admit you want no part of?

> That's OK, the point of REST is so *you* *can* do that.  I can only
> speak for myself, but we can help to some extent on the Python side of
> the REST interface.
> 
> A word of advice: we, too, talked about "modern forum software and
> interfaces that users expect", but implementing them well is a lot
> harder than we expected.  I'm not saying it's too hard for your
> developer, but stay on top of that project!  Mail is hard to combine
> with forums, and it's easy to stray into the weeds.

Who is this "we", you referenced them a few times in this email.


>  > 2. Mailman 2 does need to be ported to python 3 eventually
> 
> Sure, but that's still quite a ways away.  The main issues I can see
> would be related to TLS, where old versions of the protocol seem to be
> deprecated more and more rapidly, but it's probably easier to patch
> Python 2 for that than to port Mailman 2 to Python 3.  Sure, there may
> be non-TLS CVEs against Python 2, but I really can't see them being as
> serious as the kinds of issues that Mailman 2 itself, not to mention
> any site with mail service, would have.

I'm fairly confident in saying that Mark has said (repeatedly now) that
there will never ever ever ever ever be another Mailman2 release beyond
v2.1.30.  Stephen, why do you say there will be? Do you have the project
authority to make that statement?  Who do I beleive?

>  > 3. The decision to use Django. Maybe great for Python users
> 
> This makes no sense to me.  

I'm no fan of PHP, but I'd bet that a majority of web frontend
developers, who "Never learned Django" would say that using Django
"makes no sense to" them.  What I'm reading between the lines is that
nothing but Django was considered for MM3 (by "we") and everything else
is inferior and not worth the time.  I'd love to be wrong on that.

> If your problem with Django is that it's
> written in Python, you've got the REST interface.  That's as far as
> our responsibility goes.  See "REST is the approach" below.
> 
>  > 4. [W]ay too many methods of installing it which means all kinds of
>  > versions of Mailman 3 are in production today because Mailman
>  > versions are dependent upon what method of installation a person
>  > chooses: Distro Package, Docker, Source, others?
> 
> That's not a problem we created.  Our recommendation is, as it always
> has been, build from source.  And the problem is not going to go away.
> Users want turnkey packages such as containers, distros can't be
> stopped from building distro packages.  If you open source your
> interfaces, you'll run into the same issues.
> 
>  > I think the highest priority is to get Mailman 3 core up to speed
>  > in offering everything that Mailman 2 offers such as bounce
>  > processing.
> 
> Agreed.  I didn't even know bounce processing wasn't working until
> this summer (my production lists are all in-house to personal
> acquaintances to same-university addresses -- if mail isn't flowing to
> somebody, it's not going to anybody, even Mailman!)

MM3 has been on python.org for a while, was it not noticed there either?

>  > Then perhaps a whole new approach to interfacing with Mailman 3
>  > core is in order.
> 
> REST *is* the "Mailman 3 approach" to interfacing.  Historically, at
> the time Mailman 3 core got whipped into shape to start beta testing,
> we went with Django for Postorius, because it was the "hot" framework
> of the day, and that's what the developers who volunteered wanted to
> work with.  Of course it had to be a Python framework since we'd be
> maintaining it.  HyperKitty was a little bit different: the Fedora (or
> Red Hat?) people wanted Mailman 3 for internal reasons, and they
> contributed a pile of labor, and (AFAIK) independently chose Django
> and developed the UI based on it (which is why we have two separate
> Django configs).
> 
> *However*, the original idea was that *we* didn't know much about UI
> development, especially the peripheral features of archiving such as
> search and access control, and we wanted to encourage third parties to
> develop their own, or to integrate Mailman lists into their larger
> platforms which already provided user interfaces.
> 
>  > I hope I did not offend anyone here
> 
> The main Postorius devs aren't hanging out here, and we get only a
> little contact in the summer with the HyperKitty devs since the Fedora
> support got cut three or four years ago. ;-)  If I know Mark he
> started a little miffed but calmed down quickly since diverse UIs have
> always been part of the vision.
> 
>  > I would be interested to know if the developers of Mailman 3 are
>  > interested in the initiative I have taken to develop new interfaces
>  > for Mailman 3
> 
> As far as I know this is precisely what we wanted to happen in the
> first place.  We knew that we would have to have a bundlable
> user/admin interface and an archiver with a web interface, but the
> original intent was not that they dominate Mailman installations.  We
> should have known better, given the huge popularity of Mailman 2 with
> Pipermail (oh, Lordy) as the archiver, but hope springs eternal ....
> 
> I think further discussion should move to mailman-developers, though,
> and please introduce your UI developer(s) to us on mailman-developers
> soonish.  Nobody has huge amounts of time to put into work on Mailman
> right now 


That frightens me a bit.


> AFAIK, but I expect we will be willing to cooperate on any
> Mailman features or fixes your developer needs in the REST interface
> "in good time".
> 
> I'm going to be very busy until March 11, but after that I'll have
> some time.  Ginning up a list of REST endpoints is the kind of thing
> I'm good at, so maybe I personally could start there.

Best wishes,

-Jim P.




From phils at caerllewys.net  Fri Feb 28 09:45:17 2020
From: phils at caerllewys.net (Phil Stracchino)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 09:45:17 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <24152.61206.528428.608731@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
 <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>
 <24152.61206.528428.608731@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <ca01b00b-ca48-e7bf-95f1-5cf83db04333@caerllewys.net>

On 2020-02-28 05:44, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Mailman has the opposite problem.  We *wish* str was Unicode from the
> get-go, but it wasn't, and Mailman 2 is rife with potential encoded/
> decoded confusion because of the nature of email and the dual usage of
> str in Python 1, and the history of Mailman as an MLM for an American
> rock band (who needs no steekin' accents, we just hammer and bend the
> strings!)


This is clearly a story I didn't know.  :)  And now I'm curious...



-- 
  Phil Stracchino
  Babylon Communications
  phils at caerllewys.net
  phil at co.ordinate.org
  Landline: +1.603.293.8485
  Mobile:   +1.603.998.6958

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Fri Feb 28 11:43:04 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 11:43:04 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <ab32c0d6-1aa0-4b07-daf7-941f3eda5e8f@emwd.com>

On 2/28/20 5:52 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Too bad.  I really sympathize with your goals but am unlikely to be
> able to contribute directly to implementation (assuming an eventual
> open-sourcing).  Never learned PHP, not going to do it anytime soon.
> That's OK, the point of REST is so*you*  *can*  do that.  I can only
> speak for myself, but we can help to some extent on the Python side of
> the REST interface.


Help with interfacing with Mailman Core via REST will be nice to have. 
My programmer was happy to hear that Mailman core utilized REST but I am 
sure he may have some questions. I have a Discord server setup for 
development communication purposes that I can add you and hopefully Mark 
Sapiro to it if you want. We are also setting up the project on Gitlab 
as a private repository for now.

Usability testing is also very important and the new admin interface 
will need it. This is another part someone like you can be of an immense 
help. I am open to any sort of volunteers at this point.


> A word of advice: we, too, talked about "modern forum software and
> interfaces that users expect", but implementing them well is a lot
> harder than we expected.  I'm not saying it's too hard for your
> developer, but stay on top of that project!  Mail is hard to combine
> with forums, and it's easy to stray into the weeds.

I agree and understand. The forum side is not being considered at this 
time until we get the admin interface nailed down. Right now I am 
looking at Discourse as a motivation for developing the forum side. I 
also think for mailing lists to survive in the future, integrating both 
approaches to communications is what modern users are looking for. I 
also think the approach Mailman 3 core did with using a database and 
REST api is brilliant and forward thinking. I just think the current 
interfaces and the decision to go with Django has hurt Mailman 3 rather 
than help it.

I also mirror Jim's question of who is the "we" in this conversation. 
Why wasn't I invited? :-D


> Sure, but that's still quite a ways away.  The main issues I can see
> would be related to TLS, where old versions of the protocol seem to be
> deprecated more and more rapidly, but it's probably easier to patch
> Python 2 for that than to port Mailman 2 to Python 3.  Sure, there may
> be non-TLS CVEs against Python 2, but I really can't see them being as
> serious as the kinds of issues that Mailman 2 itself, not to mention
> any site with mail service, would have.

What prevents Mailman 3 from replacing Mailman 2 completely? Is it 
because of the interfaces for Mailman 3 totally left Mailman 2 behind or 
was it the decision to use Django? Cannot Mailman 3 be used as a 
standalone 'traditional' mailing list without the need for something 
like Hyperkitty? Can Pipermail be modified to work with Mailman 3 as 
perhaps a stopgap for Mailman 2 users to feel more comfortable with 
migrating to Mailman 3? I host hundreds of Mailman 2 lists and I cannot 
get my clients interested in Mailman 3. It doesn't have all of the 
features that Mailman 2 has when it comes to list settings, at least not 
visible and Hyperkitty is just not impressive to look at when it comes 
to providing a community feel.

I want to research to see if it is possible to provide a browser base 
interface to convert/import a Mailman 2 list into a Mailman 3 list 
without the need of using a command line. Again I am just focusing on 
the list (admin) settings to be imported at this point not archives into 
a forum setting.


> This makes no sense to me.  If your problem with Django is that it's
> written in Python, you've got the REST interface.  That's as far as
> our responsibility goes.  See "REST is the approach" below.

I assume Django was primarily chosen was because it was written in 
Python. Maybe I am wrong here.? My main problem with Django is you have 
to handle a 3rd interface with Mailman 3. So we have three: Postorius, 
Hyperkitty, and Django. When it comes to a U.I. perspective, Django's 
admin interface leaves a lot to desire. I am hoping to merge the need to 
use two interfaces for administration of a mailman 3 list to one, 
beautiful, easy to use, superfast and glorious administrative interface. 
In other words, One Admin Interface To Rule Them All. I am having some 
fun here but there is a lot of truth that describes my intentions. When 
I first explored using Mailman 3 and I came across the word: Django, I 
said "what the heck is that???". I am pretty sure I am not the only with 
that response. I am still, btw, saying that about Django because I am 
having a very difficult time wrapping my head around its logic.


> That's not a problem we created.  Our recommendation is, as it always
> has been, build from source.  And the problem is not going to go away.
> Users want turnkey packages such as containers, distros can't be
> stopped from building distro packages.  If you open source your
> interfaces, you'll run into the same issues.

I am not trying to blame anyone here. I just seems to me there is a lot 
of confusion with the use of Mailman 3.

The problem is the discrepancies between the versions. Once bounce 
processing shows up in Postorius that discrepancy will spread even 
further. The confusing state of installation documentation is also a 
serious problem. I ended up writing my own that I can get consistent 
results from with installing Mailman 3 on new servers. So one of my 
goals in coming up with a new approach is to make the full setup of a 
Mailman 3 server far easier to do AND document.


> REST*is*  the "Mailman 3 approach" to interfacing.  Historically, at
> the time Mailman 3 core got whipped into shape to start beta testing,
> we went with Django for Postorius, because it was the "hot" framework
> of the day, and that's what the developers who volunteered wanted to
> work with.  Of course it had to be a Python framework since we'd be
> maintaining it.  HyperKitty was a little bit different: the Fedora (or
> Red Hat?) people wanted Mailman 3 for internal reasons, and they
> contributed a pile of labor, and (AFAIK) independently chose Django
> and developed the UI based on it (which is why we have two separate
> Django configs).

That is fine but what I did not see is the use of U.I. designers. 
Developers make the WORST U.I. designers. U.I. design in my opinion will 
seriously hinder the acceptance of an application no matter how great it 
is. This is good information to know regardless so thank you for sharing.

> *However*, the original idea was that*we*  didn't know much about UI
> development, especially the peripheral features of archiving such as
> search and access control, and we wanted to encourage third parties to
> develop their own, or to integrate Mailman lists into their larger
> platforms which already provided user interfaces.

So where was this encouragement? What larger platform did you have in 
mind to integrate Mailman lists into? I am still surprised to see no one 
has come up with a new interface for Mailman 3. I think it is important 
to find out why that is but maybe in another discussion thread.

 From what I can see Mailman 3 core is rock solid. Using a database and 
the REST api was a great move so for me, that leaves the actually public 
facing interfaces to be scrutinized and that is what I have done. Based 
upon my observations? I decided to try to do something about what I see 
as some glaring weaknesses in Postorius/Django Admin/Hyperkitty.


> The main Postorius devs aren't hanging out here, and we get only a
> little contact in the summer with the HyperKitty devs since the Fedora
> support got cut three or four years ago.;-)   If I know Mark he
> started a little miffed but calmed down quickly since diverse UIs have
> always been part of the vision.

Mark is awesome and I have a great working relationship with him via 
these lists throughout the years. I believe I will have that with him in 
the future as well.

> As far as I know this is precisely what we wanted to happen in the
> first place.  We knew that we would have to have a bundlable
> user/admin interface and an archiver with a web interface, but the
> original intent was not that they dominate Mailman installations.  We
> should have known better, given the huge popularity of Mailman 2 with
> Pipermail (oh, Lordy) as the archiver, but hope springs eternal ....
>
> I think further discussion should move to mailman-developers, though,
> and please introduce your UI developer(s) to us on mailman-developers
> soonish.  Nobody has huge amounts of time to put into work on Mailman
> right now AFAIK, but I expect we will be willing to cooperate on any
> Mailman features or fixes your developer needs in the REST interface
> "in good time".

Will do and thank you for your thoughtful reply.

>
> I'm going to be very busy until March 11, but after that I'll have
> some time.  Ginning up a list of REST endpoints is the kind of thing
> I'm good at, so maybe I personally could start there.

Sounds great!

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 28 13:07:46 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 10:07:46 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
Message-ID: <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>

On 2/28/20 6:17 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 19:52 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> Brian Carpenter writes:
>>
>>  > I have hired a professional PHP developer to begin work on a new 
>>  > admin/forum interface for Mailman 3.
>>
>> Too bad.  I really sympathize with your goals but am unlikely to be
>> able to contribute directly to implementation (assuming an eventual
>> open-sourcing).  Never learned PHP, not going to do it anytime soon.
> 
> Stephen, It's difficult for me to parse your thought process on this.
> Why do you say "Too bad" about someone wanting to improve something that
> you admit you want no part of?


Well, Steve channeled me earlier, so I'll return the favor. I think
Steve is saying "Too bad" he is only talking about the choice of PHP as
a platform rather than Python. We absolutely encourage people to develop
alternatives to Postorius and HyperKitty for archiving and web
management of Mailman. I think all Steve is saying is he could be more
helpful with Python as opposed to PHP.

See this paragraph:

>> That's OK, the point of REST is so *you* *can* do that.  I can only
>> speak for myself, but we can help to some extent on the Python side of
>> the REST interface.



> Who is this "we", you referenced them a few times in this email.


See the initial paragraph in the Acknowledgements section at
<https://www.list.org/>.



> I'm fairly confident in saying that Mark has said (repeatedly now) that
> there will never ever ever ever ever be another Mailman2 release beyond
> v2.1.30.  Stephen, why do you say there will be? Do you have the project
> authority to make that statement?  Who do I beleive?


Actually, I have said there will not be another release from the GNU
Mailman project. That does not preclude anyone from forking that project
from Launchpad and doing whatever with it.

I personally am not interested in porting Mailman 2 to Python 3. That's
already been done. The result, with a real backend database and some
extensions such as the concept of "user" that doesn't exist in MM 2, is
Mailman 3 core.


> What I'm reading between the lines is that
> nothing but Django was considered for MM3 (by "we") and everything else
> is inferior and not worth the time.  I'd love to be wrong on that.


The web based archiving and list management we distribute are based on
Django because that's how the people who developed those things wanted
to do it.

The whole point of Mailman 3 is all that stuff is separate from the core
engine and communicates with core via a REST API, so there can be lots
of different web management UIs. We knew if we released Mailman 3 core
only without a web UI for list management and archive access, no one
would use it, so we needed those things and the people who were willing
to implement them built what we have.

We certainly hoped that there would be people like Brian implementing
alternatives and we're glad to see it.

>> Agreed.  I didn't even know bounce processing wasn't working until
>> this summer (my production lists are all in-house to personal
>> acquaintances to same-university addresses -- if mail isn't flowing to
>> somebody, it's not going to anybody, even Mailman!)
> 
> MM3 has been on python.org for a while, was it not noticed there either?


Of course. We began discussing this almost 3 years ago
<https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/issues/343#note_31870366>. The
implementation was mostly done last year by a GSOC student.

We are a small project. We have very few people working on Mailman on a
regular basis, and everyone is a volunteer, no one is paid. If you want
things to happen faster, please contribute.

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

From jimpop at domainmail.org  Fri Feb 28 13:24:19 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 13:24:19 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <fc49ade7d9d52cc8965e921578ad2dd1671fbd91.camel@domainmail.org>

On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 10:07 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/28/20 6:17 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 19:52 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > > Brian Carpenter writes:
> > > 
> > >  > I have hired a professional PHP developer to begin work on a new 
> > >  > admin/forum interface for Mailman 3.
> > > 
> > > Too bad.  I really sympathize with your goals but am unlikely to be
> > > able to contribute directly to implementation (assuming an eventual
> > > open-sourcing).  Never learned PHP, not going to do it anytime soon.
> > 
> > Stephen, It's difficult for me to parse your thought process on this.
> > Why do you say "Too bad" about someone wanting to improve something that
> > you admit you want no part of?
> 
> Well, Steve channeled me earlier, so I'll return the favor. I think
> Steve is saying "Too bad" he is only talking about the choice of PHP as
> a platform rather than Python. We absolutely encourage people to develop
> alternatives to Postorius and HyperKitty for archiving and web
> management of Mailman. I think all Steve is saying is he could be more
> helpful with Python as opposed to PHP.
> 
> See this paragraph:
> 
> > > That's OK, the point of REST is so *you* *can* do that.  I can only
> > > speak for myself, but we can help to some extent on the Python side of
> > > the REST interface.
> 
> 
> > Who is this "we", you referenced them a few times in this email.
> 
> See the initial paragraph in the Acknowledgements section at
> <https://www.list.org/>;.
> 
> 
> 
> > I'm fairly confident in saying that Mark has said (repeatedly now) that
> > there will never ever ever ever ever be another Mailman2 release beyond
> > v2.1.30.  Stephen, why do you say there will be? Do you have the project
> > authority to make that statement?  Who do I beleive?
> 
> Actually, I have said there will not be another release from the GNU
> Mailman project. That does not preclude anyone from forking that project
> from Launchpad and doing whatever with it.

I get that, but that sounds sharply different than what Stephen was
saying.

> I personally am not interested in porting Mailman 2 to Python 3. That's
> already been done. The result, with a real backend database and some
> extensions such as the concept of "user" that doesn't exist in MM 2, is
> Mailman 3 core.
> 
> 
> > What I'm reading between the lines is that
> > nothing but Django was considered for MM3 (by "we") and everything else
> > is inferior and not worth the time.  I'd love to be wrong on that.
> 
> The web based archiving and list management we distribute are based on
> Django because that's how the people who developed those things wanted
> to do it.
> 
> The whole point of Mailman 3 is all that stuff is separate from the core
> engine and communicates with core via a REST API, so there can be lots
> of different web management UIs. We knew if we released Mailman 3 core
> only without a web UI for list management and archive access, no one
> would use it, so we needed those things and the people who were willing
> to implement them built what we have.
> 
> We certainly hoped that there would be people like Brian implementing
> alternatives and we're glad to see it.
> 
> > > Agreed.  I didn't even know bounce processing wasn't working until
> > > this summer (my production lists are all in-house to personal
> > > acquaintances to same-university addresses -- if mail isn't flowing to
> > > somebody, it's not going to anybody, even Mailman!)
> > 
> > MM3 has been on python.org for a while, was it not noticed there either?
> 
> Of course. We began discussing this almost 3 years ago
> <https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/issues/343#note_31870366>;. The
> implementation was mostly done last year by a GSOC student.

I think that is Brian's and a lot of other people's concern.  3 years to
implement something into MM3 that was a core feature in MM2.  I realize
this next question is going to sound bombastic, I assure you it's not
meant that way:  What other things are missing or not available
presently in MM3 that are taken for granite in MM2?

> We are a small project. We have very few people working on Mailman on a
> regular basis, and everyone is a volunteer, no one is paid. If you want
> things to happen faster, please contribute.
> 

~$ grep "Jim Popovitch" ~/devel/Mailman/NEWS | wc -l
10

I don't think that I've been sitting on the fence, in fact I think I've
been contributing a lot if you include not just source contributions but
also the PPAs.  I wouldn't say that I'm a principal developer, but I'm
not off in some remote corner unfamiliar with the product and project.

-Jim P.






From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 28 13:55:26 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 10:55:26 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <fc49ade7d9d52cc8965e921578ad2dd1671fbd91.camel@domainmail.org>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <fc49ade7d9d52cc8965e921578ad2dd1671fbd91.camel@domainmail.org>
Message-ID: <5c0bd9fa-c468-4ab0-5ef2-51c86f4638ea@msapiro.net>

On 2/28/20 10:24 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> I think that is Brian's and a lot of other people's concern.  3 years to
> implement something into MM3 that was a core feature in MM2.  I realize
> this next question is going to sound bombastic, I assure you it's not
> meant that way:  What other things are missing or not available
> presently in MM3 that are taken for granite in MM2?


I think almost nothing is missing from Mailman core. We don't have
'sibling lists' or 'topics', but other than that, I think it's all there.

Quite a few core settings are not exposed in Postorius but we're
chipping away at that.


>> We are a small project. We have very few people working on Mailman on a
>> regular basis, and everyone is a volunteer, no one is paid. If you want
>> things to happen faster, please contribute.
>>
> 
> ~$ grep "Jim Popovitch" ~/devel/Mailman/NEWS | wc -l
> 10
> 
> I don't think that I've been sitting on the fence, in fact I think I've
> been contributing a lot if you include not just source contributions but
> also the PPAs.  I wouldn't say that I'm a principal developer, but I'm
> not off in some remote corner unfamiliar with the product and project.


I know that you (Jim P) have contributed a lot to MM 2 and we all and I
in particular appreciate that, but I was thinking specifically of MM 3.

Note also that I still spend a lot of time helping people with MM 2
questions. This is time that could otherwise be spent on MM 3. This is a
big part of why I've said 2.1.30 will be the last MM 2 release.

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

From brian_carpenter at emwd.com  Fri Feb 28 21:26:50 2020
From: brian_carpenter at emwd.com (Brian Carpenter)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 21:26:50 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <5c0bd9fa-c468-4ab0-5ef2-51c86f4638ea@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <fc49ade7d9d52cc8965e921578ad2dd1671fbd91.camel@domainmail.org>
 <5c0bd9fa-c468-4ab0-5ef2-51c86f4638ea@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <62fc63d1-af39-f013-9ac0-8566440b25c1@emwd.com>

On 2/28/20 1:55 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Quite a few core settings are not exposed in Postorius but we're
> chipping away at that.

Is there a list somewhere to see what core settings have not been 
exposed in Postorius yet?

-- 
Please let me know if you need further assistance.

Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients.
Brian Carpenter
EMWD.com

--
EMWD's Knowledgebase:
https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase

EMWD's Community Forums
http://discourse.emwd.com/


From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Sat Feb 29 02:26:43 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 16:26:43 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <ab32c0d6-1aa0-4b07-daf7-941f3eda5e8f@emwd.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <ab32c0d6-1aa0-4b07-daf7-941f3eda5e8f@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <24154.4659.320424.952580@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

@mailman-users
I'm going to get into a lot of design here, so I'm moving the thread to
mailman-developers at python.org.  Reply-To set; please respect.  Brian
kept in Reply-To as a courtesy, don't know if he's subscribed over there.

@mailman-developers Brian is planning to develop an alternative web UI
for admin and archives.  I don't see this as a disincentive to
Postorius or HyperKitty development (proposed implementation language
is PHP, so we'll still need something we can support that we can
bundle), and alternatives have always been part of the vision.  I for
one plan to cooperate, and hope others feel the same.  Thread starts
here on mailman-users:

https://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users at python.org/msg72530.html

@Brian
If you aren't subscribed to mailman-developers, and don't want to
subscribe,, I'll try to keep you in the loop.

Brian Carpenter writes:

 > I agree and understand. The forum side is not being considered at
 > this time until we get the admin interface nailed down. Right now I
 > am looking at Discourse as a motivation for developing the forum
 > side.  I also think for mailing lists to survive in the future,
 > integrating both approaches to communications is what modern users
 > are looking for.

The Python developers looked at Discourse, I think there's actually a
fair amount of activity.  "I think" because I don't participate in
their forum server, not even entirely sure it's Discourse (checked, it
is).  I don't miss it at all.  I don't think the Discourse users miss
mailing lists at all.  There seems to be near zero crosstalk, even
less crosstalk between Discourse and the lists than there is between
the lists and the issue tracker.

I don't know what would happen with better integration.  Discourse
integration of email, uh, "is poor" IMHO, which in my opinion is an
indication that integration is somewhere between very hard and
impossible -- the original author of Discourse seems to be a brilliant
designer and programmer, with plenty of sympathy for user needs.  If
he didn't do it well, it's surely not at all easy.  A lot of people
feel as you do that "both" is the right answer, and there certainly
was a lot of demand for "both" in Python when Discourse was set up
there.

 > I just think the current interfaces and the decision to go with
 > Django has hurt Mailman 3 rather than help it.

That's assuming that the likely alternative was a non-Django framework
rather than "ssh to the host and fire up python mailman.client".  It
was "ssh to the host and fire up python mailman.client", though. ;-)

 > I also mirror Jim's question of who is the "we" in this
 > conversation.

In practice, it was an "I": Barry Warsaw started rewriting the core
around a decade ago.  Then when a beta-ready version became imminent a
few years later, a couple more "I"s, IIRC Terri Oda and Florian Fuchs
wrote much of Postorius (which Barry named), and the Fedora folks did
HyperKitty because they wanted a forum-like archiver it for the Fedora
lists.  For the last few years, both Postorius and HyperKitty have
been maintained and developed by the "Mailman project team", but those
are the folks primarily responsible for the original design decisions
AIUI.

That's how this works.  People see a need, they start hacking on it
without fanfare because they're not committed to it, once they have an
idea of how much work a commitment involves and they're OK with that
they commit and announce, which often has a chilling effect on
independent alternatives, and tends to cut out users who don't know
they need pay attention if they want input to something that will be
available years later (if at all).  I don't know what to do about the
users; Barry did talk about Mailman 3 on-list occasionally, mostly in
response to issues raised about Mailman 2.

 > Why wasn't I invited? :-D

As always in open source, everybody in general is invited, (almost)
nobody gets a personal invitation.[1]  It's unfortunate that the way
things work folks like you and Jim don't find it so easy to pop over
to mailman-developers to find out about these things in advance, but
we also don't want to burden mailman-users with nitty-gritty details
that that may never be relevant to them.

 > What prevents Mailman 3 from replacing Mailman 2 completely?

Mailman 2 ain't broke, so I don't advise people who are happy with
their installations to try to fix it.  Not even by installing Mailman
3. ;-)

 > Is it because of the interfaces for Mailman 3 totally left Mailman
 > 2 behind or was it the decision to use Django?

Mailman 3 cannot be a drop-in replacement for Mailman 2 because by
design Mailman 3 core has no comprehensive administrative or user
access, except via shell access to the Mailman server.  Otherwise, the
only user access is subscribe/unsubscribe by mail, and I don't think
there's any administrative access by mail (maybe moderation can be
enabled? but it would be disabled by default because mail is tres
insecure by default).

 > Cannot Mailman 3 be used as a standalone 'traditional' mailing list
 > without the need for something like Hyperkitty?

You really need Postorius for the administrator, and it's extremely
desirable for the users.  HyperKitty is trivial to avoid: just don't
have archives.  Almost as trivial is to use mail-archive.com or similar.

 > Can Pipermail be modified to work with Mailman 3 as perhaps a
 > stopgap for Mailman 2 users to feel more comfortable with migrating
 > to Mailman 3?

Yes, but why?  I don't know any users who prefer Pipermail to
HyperKitty.  It's the site admins who (occasionally) end up tearing
their hair out over configuration.

Maybe you mean Mailman 2's native CGIs for admin and user
configuration vs. Postorius rather than the Pipermail archiver?

 > I host hundreds of Mailman 2 lists and I cannot get my clients
 > interested in Mailman 3. It doesn't have all of the features that
 > Mailman 2 has when it comes to list settings, at least not visible

This is true.  I think the main interest from users and list admins is
that for some lists HyperKitty is an acceptable alternative for people
who strongly prefer forum-in-a-browser (not denying your point about
its UI, just saying that on some lists it's good enough).  It's not
prominent to most users, but having a single user that can have
multiple addresses and multiple subscriptions is an advantage (this is
supported in core, not just in Postorius).  And for site admins,
having proper support for virtual domains is big (though you may not
see it that way if you're happy enough with cPanel's workaround).

 > and Hyperkitty is just not impressive to look at when it comes to
 > providing a community feel.

Can you be more specific?  User feedback here has mostly been that
HyperKitty is more Bright! Shiny! and has better search than Pipermail
(which has none, natively), and I have no intuition for what you mean
by "community feel".  Again, perhaps you mean "Postorius" rather than
"HyperKitty" for some of this?

BTW, any confusion between the two is natural, IMO.  Most sites (and I
believe the default) are configured to assume that visiting the
archives is frequent, subscription and user management rare.
Therefore the default for the "lists" subdomain is HyperKitty, with
some other URL to access Postorius.  And of course the user thinks of
the whole thing just as "Mailman". :-(  It's not a seamless UX, but
there's usually no explicit divide, either.

 > I want to research to see if it is possible to provide a browser
 > base interface to convert/import a Mailman 2 list into a Mailman 3
 > list without the need of using a command line. Again I am just
 > focusing on the list (admin) settings to be imported at this point
 > not archives into a forum setting.

This can happen -- there's a pretty good script for this already --
but I think at present about 5% of lists require some admin
intervention besides running the script.  I'm not sure what it will
take to get enough of that last 5%.  Mark and Abhilash would have a
better handle on this, I haven't been keeping up with Mailman 3 user
support much lately.

 > > This makes no sense to me.  If your problem with Django is that it's
 > > written in Python, you've got the REST interface.  That's as far as
 > > our responsibility goes.  See "REST is the approach" below.
 > 
 > I assume Django was primarily chosen was because it was written in 
 > Python.

Of course, that was a requirement.  *We* have to maintain the
bundlable web interfaces.  There were no external volunteers to write
an administrative interface.  The Fedora people who wrote HyperKitty
were ultimately funded by Red Hat, a company which has been all in on
Python for more than two decades.  I don't think they were *required*
to use Python, but I'm not at all surprised they had a strong bias.
Also, the mailman.client Python bindings for the REST API were already
available, and provide that API to Python applications.  No such
bindings were available for other languages or platforms.  (I think
there are now node.js bindings for the REST API, but that was a couple
years ago and I don't know if they are maintained or even used.)

There were alternative frameworks; I'm pretty sure Flask (very
minimal) and Pyramid (much more modular than Django), as well as the
venerable Zope of course, were available and all meet the "Python"
desideratum.  The fact is that at that time Django was considered
Python's rival to running on Rails.  It was the current hotness
(AFAIK, it still is in the Python world), and it had an ORM and
plugins for all the stuff we thought we would need for a robust
administrative application (such as social auth).

 > My main problem with Django is you have to handle a 3rd interface
 > with Mailman 3. So we have three: Postorius, Hyperkitty, and Django.

I don't understand the Django part.  After installation I've never
touched django-admin, I've never used the Django web administration
interface, and I recall only a few cases where I needed to mess with
Django's config files at installation.

 > In other words, [I'm aiming at] One Admin Interface To Rule Them All.

If it's not in Python, we won't be able to support its internals, and
that probably means we won't be able to bundle it.  So it won't be the
OAITRTA.  It might be the VBAITRTA, but people will only get it in a
hosted environment such as EMWD or a distro uber-package that defaults
to it.

BTW, even if you eliminate Django, you may still have the problem of
administration for a database backend, depending on how barebones the
VBITRTA is.  Mailman core has no provision for adding additional
profile information to its database, while both Postorius and
HyperKitty do keep such information in separate tables (of course in
most cases the same RDBMS backend is used for all three).  The
archiver will almost certainly want to keep additional information
(thread and author indicies, maybe a keyword and/or full-text search
index) in a backend, although I guess you could stick with Pipermail
or a similar architecture and use static index files for thread,
author, and date views.

 > I am still, btw, saying that about Django because I am having a
 > very difficult time wrapping my head around its logic.

Nothing wrong with that!  Django is quite opinionated, as well as
being remarkably powerful.  But if we'd been a Ruby shop, we would
have written it in Rails, I'm pretty sure, and you'd need to deal with
that.  That's how these things work.

 > I just seems to me there is a lot of confusion with the use of
 > Mailman 3.

There's a lot of confusion with Mailman 2, as well, as a review of the
last year of malman-users would show.  I guess you just don't notice
because you're a hosting service with a long history of Mailman 2 use.
It's email, OF COURSE there's a lot of confusion. :-(

 > The problem is the discrepancies between the versions. Once bounce 
 > processing shows up in Postorius that discrepancy will spread even 
 > further.

Sure.  Despite our complaints about lack of resources, there is a lot
of progress being made.  There's also a ton of change in the email
and web app world in the last five years: DMARC, ARC, social auth,
2-factor auth, SSL and TLS protocol version deprecations.  We have to
keep up with some of them, and we need to prioritize.

 > The confusing state of installation documentation is also a serious
 > problem. I ended up writing my own that I can get consistent
 > results from with installing Mailman 3 on new servers.

Yeah, we tried participating in Google Season of Docs.  It produced
some new docs I'll be integrating soon, but it wasn't what I'd hoped.
Docs that anticipate user problems are just really hard.  Much easier
to improve them in retrospect.  (I'll buy you a drink if out of the
first ten new Mailman 3 site admins you hand your docs to, fewer than
five have problems installing Mailman 3 using them.  I'm sure they're
very good docs, but I doubt that they handle more than one MTA, for
example, or more than one httpd.)

 > So one of my goals in coming up with a new approach is to make the
 > full setup of a Mailman 3 server far easier to do AND document.

An excellent goal, and I'm confident you'll succeed.  It may take
longer than you expect, that's all.

 > That is fine but what I did not see is the use of U.I. designers.

There was one who was starting work on HyperKitty (she said, on the
Fedora lists many moons back).  Don't know what happened to that.
Probably $DAYJOB.  She's very good and in high demand.

 > So where was this encouragement [to provide alternative interfaces]?

The REST interface itself.

It's not like we had money to put behind third party projects, and we
already had Postorius, and an outside project working on HyperKitty.
That's the business model behind volunteer open source.  People come
together to work on projects for their own reasons.  They do what they
feel like, and eventually they leave.  They're strong on producing
code.  They even produce code to automate management of the project,
they even produce code to automatically document the project, but
they're normally not so strong on the actual management or
documentation. ;-)

To be honest, I can't say that for-profit dev organizations are all
that much better in my experience (although my experience is skewed to
very long-lived open source projects, so they've been improving their
workflows and their docs, and cultivating "organizational culture",
for a long time).

 > What larger platform did you have in mind to integrate Mailman
 > lists into?

Anything that needed to distribute mail in a user-configurable
manner.  But *we* weren't going to do the integration.

 > I am still surprised to see no one has come up with a new interface
 > for Mailman 3.

As I wrote earlier, we were and are amazed at the prevalence of sites
that just stand up Mailman 2 and Pipermail with no search, especially
if they have a lot of private lists inaccessible to Google and
friends.  So nobody has a strong incentive to develop new interfaces
as long as we provide something that mostly works.  Until somebody,
such as you, does.

 > Mark is awesome and I have a great working relationship with him
 > via these lists throughout the years. I believe I will have that
 > with him in the future as well.

Awesome indeed (stop blushing, Mark!), and that's why *we* look
forward to him spending more time on Mailman 3. :-)

Steve

Footnotes: 
[1]  I did, once, so I can't say *no*body.


From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Sat Feb 29 02:27:33 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 16:27:33 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <62fc63d1-af39-f013-9ac0-8566440b25c1@emwd.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <fc49ade7d9d52cc8965e921578ad2dd1671fbd91.camel@domainmail.org>
 <5c0bd9fa-c468-4ab0-5ef2-51c86f4638ea@msapiro.net>
 <62fc63d1-af39-f013-9ac0-8566440b25c1@emwd.com>
Message-ID: <24154.4709.108839.514967@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Brian Carpenter writes:
 > On 2/28/20 1:55 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
 > > Quite a few core settings are not exposed in Postorius but we're
 > > chipping away at that.
 > 
 > Is there a list somewhere to see what core settings have not been 
 > exposed in Postorius yet?

Implicit in the Postorius UI and the list of REST API endpoints. ;-)
Making that explicit is part of the task I proposed for myself.

I don't think that there are a lot.

Steve

From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Sat Feb 29 02:28:15 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 16:28:15 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <ca01b00b-ca48-e7bf-95f1-5cf83db04333@caerllewys.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
 <3f1821ef-c2af-2150-c5e9-4e16a9042e42@caerllewys.net>
 <24152.61206.528428.608731@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <ca01b00b-ca48-e7bf-95f1-5cf83db04333@caerllewys.net>
Message-ID: <24154.4751.581058.852948@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Phil Stracchino writes:
 > On 2020-02-28 05:44, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

 > > str in Python 1, and the history of Mailman as an MLM for an American
 > > rock band (who needs no steekin' accents, we just hammer and bend the
 > > strings!)
 > 
 > This is clearly a story I didn't know.  :)  And now I'm curious...

John Viega was a friend of somebody in the Dave Matthews Band, maybe
Matthews himself.  In the mid-90s, they needed a mailing list to tell
people where they were playing, John didn't like any of the MLMs
available, so he wrote Mailman.  For more info, you'd have to chase
down John or Barry Warsaw, I think.  Maybe Mark knows more.

Barry wrote a chapter on Mailman in "The Architecture of Open Source
Applications", there is some historical stuff in there.  And
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=dave+matthews+band+GNU+Mailman
brings up a bunch of relevant-looking links.

Thanks for asking, I may have to follow some of those myself!

Steve

P.S. It is a great story, and a great advert for free/open source
software!


From turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp  Sat Feb 29 02:28:34 2020
From: turnbull.stephen.fw at u.tsukuba.ac.jp (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 16:28:34 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Mark Sapiro writes:

 > Well, Steve channeled me earlier, so I'll return the favor.

And did it with extreme precision and accuracy.  Sorry if I created
any misunderstandings.

The only thing I have to add is that mailman-users at python.org is not
going away.  Furthermore, I expect that Mark and I, at least, will be
here for the foreseeable future.  That's because not only are existing
Mailman 2 installations not going away any time soon, there's every
reason to believe that people will continue installing Mailman 2 for
quite some time (even if it might be more convenient for *us* if
everybody would switch to Mailman 3 ;-).

Steve


From jimpop at domainmail.org  Sat Feb 29 10:02:09 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:02:09 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <32a3d7a40db3f137613c2f915c5f7cb24ba6ac56.camel@domainmail.org>

On Sat, 2020-02-29 at 16:28 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Mark Sapiro writes:
> 
>  > Well, Steve channeled me earlier, so I'll return the favor.
> 
> And did it with extreme precision and accuracy.  Sorry if I created
> any misunderstandings.
> 
> The only thing I have to add is that mailman-users at python.org is not
> going away.  Furthermore, I expect that Mark and I, at least, will be
> here for the foreseeable future.  That's because not only are existing
> Mailman 2 installations not going away any time soon, there's every
> reason to believe that people will continue installing Mailman 2 for
> quite some time (even if it might be more convenient for *us* if
> everybody would switch to Mailman 3 ;-).
> 
> Steve

Steve, given your comments above, please expand upon this scenario:  If
a CSF/CSS is identified in Mailman v2.1.30 in May-2020, what will be
done to address it?

-Jim P.


From jimpop at domainmail.org  Sat Feb 29 10:53:19 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:53:19 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
 (was: Handling Munged From Addresses)
In-Reply-To: <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <8006602E-7393-407A-B34A-EB8434512A43@billmail.scconsult.com>
Message-ID: <a48033a395ab5bbf2f0806d4c04910b55d437460.camel@domainmail.org>

On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 14:51 -0500, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2020, at 14:24, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> > Personally, I'd like to see the GNU Mailman project have a formal
> > Mailman 2.3 release that supports Python3, I feel that there would be 
> > a
> > lot of support for that.
> 
> I'm sure there would be widespread applause and congratulations if such 
> a thing were actually released. That sort of "support" is unhelpful 
> towards actually making such a release.
> 
> The needed support is the actual skilled effort of writing the required 
> Python3 code. I don't have the time to hunt down the specific 
> statements, but I have vague recollections that both Barry and Mark have 
> said repeatedly that doing so would be substantially more effort than 
> they are willing to put into anything built on the MM2 architecture.


Interestingly enough, here's a roadmap on exactly how to do it:  :)

https://engineering.linkedin.com/blog/2020/how-we-retired-python-2-and-improved-developer-happiness


-Jim P.


From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb 29 12:37:23 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 09:37:23 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <9230cd67-8990-4fb6-7f04-63afea3abd59@msapiro.net>

On 2/28/20 11:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Mark Sapiro writes:
> 
>  > Well, Steve channeled me earlier, so I'll return the favor.
> 
> And did it with extreme precision and accuracy.  Sorry if I created
> any misunderstandings.


None whatsoever, at least not from me ;)

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

From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb 29 13:46:12 2020
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:46:12 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <32a3d7a40db3f137613c2f915c5f7cb24ba6ac56.camel@domainmail.org>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <32a3d7a40db3f137613c2f915c5f7cb24ba6ac56.camel@domainmail.org>
Message-ID: <f6e94899-a60e-b964-0f30-12520c2e9921@msapiro.net>

On 2/29/20 7:02 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> If
> a CSF/CSS is identified in Mailman v2.1.30 in May-2020, what will be
> done to address it?


I'd say it depend on the details of how serious the vulnerability is,
how easy it is to exploit and how hard it is to fix. I am not opposed to
Mailman 2.1.30-x security fix releases.

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

From jimpop at domainmail.org  Sat Feb 29 14:28:26 2020
From: jimpop at domainmail.org (Jim Popovitch)
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 14:28:26 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] The last release from the GNU Mailman project
In-Reply-To: <f6e94899-a60e-b964-0f30-12520c2e9921@msapiro.net>
References: <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc.ref@bellsouth.net>
 <1bd9ad85-1fbf-97bd-0203-93573ca06ebc@bellsouth.net>
 <fdbb21b1-6c67-e460-2577-6963f3475773@msapiro.net>
 <efd24a1c15015ea97ed1e5fabb1701c8d7e82e99.camel@domainmail.org>
 <2812ac4e-693f-27ca-1344-2e8ed6b63781@msapiro.net>
 <f32e85e1-87b8-3724-e7f5-76d1bfcdc985@bellsouth.net>
 <13721b1b-a0a1-b764-d1d8-f686929a40f4@msapiro.net>
 <b28cd85685f0a59972642994577499fcd78b4d98.camel@domainmail.org>
 <b5f73858-16ab-78e0-5c79-ccb2c3b097b8@msapiro.net>
 <2c0aa580-e03e-cca8-2e7b-1423c467b1b6@emwd.com>
 <24152.61688.525891.15443@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <eafb10a9103297dfd4c62a5f40b453ffb3b54e38.camel@domainmail.org>
 <aa54434f-a839-491d-3129-2c2903f62fd7@msapiro.net>
 <24154.4770.669929.292630@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
 <32a3d7a40db3f137613c2f915c5f7cb24ba6ac56.camel@domainmail.org>
 <f6e94899-a60e-b964-0f30-12520c2e9921@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <567682e4435e0997d170097e89148294c73d0cdf.camel@domainmail.org>

On Sat, 2020-02-29 at 10:46 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 2/29/20 7:02 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-Users wrote:
> > If
> > a CSF/CSS is identified in Mailman v2.1.30 in May-2020, what will be
> > done to address it?
> 
> I'd say it depend on the details of how serious the vulnerability is,
> how easy it is to exploit and how hard it is to fix. I am not opposed to
> Mailman 2.1.30-x security fix releases.


Thank you, it is reassuring to hear you say that. 

-Jim P.