> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailman-developers-bounces+john.airey=rnib.org.uk(a)python.org
> Behalf Of Tollef Fog Heen
> Sent: Monday, 06 September 2004 16:47
> To: mailman-developers(a)python.org
> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] Min requirements for
> running Mailman?
> * Nigel Metheringham
> | I'd tend to take this as:-
> | * Mailman is a bitch to package
> Not really. It's fairly well-behaved in my experience. It's a
> semi-large web application with some requirements, but nothing
> | * RH have packaged it for a while
> | * RH found a good few of the gotchas in packaging Mailman
> | * RH have subsequently learnt from their mistakes and recently
> | have produced good packages.
> | * Other distros may do better, or may yet have to
> learn from their
> | mistakes :-)
> Mailman has been in Debian since June 1998 (1.0b4), so we've been
> working on it for a while as well. I think our packages are of good
> quality (far from perfect, but making perfect packages is _a lot_ of
> work. ;)
Just to throw my tuppence worth in...
I've used mailman since Red Hat 7.2. I found that the version that came with
Red Hat 9.0 wouldn't work for me (ie I couldn't upgrade to it) so I stuck
with the 7.2 version (2.0.13) till the end of Red Hat 9 support.
We are now running the 2.1.5 version that comes with Fedora but running it
on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). I did however have to recreate all the
lists by hand in an overnight shift (what fun that was...) a few days before
leaving the country (hence the rush). At that time I didn't know I could
export the configuration (Doh!).
Red Hat have taken some packages out of RHEL eg arpwatch and mysql-server
(although this is in the "extras" channel) even though these are in the
source RPM. Mailman is currently not included but might be being put back in
to RHEL 4.0. I would like to hope so, as I find 2.1.5 far superior to
John Airey, BSc (Jt Hons), CNA, RHCE
Internet systems support officer, ITCSD, Royal National Institute of the
Bakewell Road, Peterborough PE2 6XU,
Tel.: +44 (0) 1733 375299 Fax: +44 (0) 1733 370848 John.Airey(a)rnib.org.uk
To truly believe in Evolution requires complete faith that life has no
meaning. Fortunately there are billions of people who aren't that stupid.
NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it
and any attachments from your system.
RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it
cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.
Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
those of RNIB.
RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227
I am new to python and mailman. i have a problem, need to find a
when getting mails to the mailman from Lotus Domino client 5.0.10, the
mail's does not have In-Reply-To header. Because of this the mail does
not get threaded properly. pls tell me how i can solve this isue.
I have Scrubber enabled on my Mailman 2.1.5 configuration. It works
fine stripping the attachments, except, why does it change a Microsoft
Word extension ".doc" to a ".bin"? This makes it difficult to open the
attachment, because you have to either save it to your hard drive and
associate the file to open in the correct program, or choose which
program to open it with. Why doesn't Scrubber just leave it at .doc
and then when you click on the stripped attachment link, wouldn't it
know to bring up the correct application and display the file? Or would
it thing the content type is HTML?
Any solutions or work around. Please respond this is critical that I
know if there is something I can do.
Academic Computing Analyst Sr.
Everything must point to him.
I'm new here and i've tried to start sending a patch to control the
number of members per list.Can anyone check that? I keep it small as
possible to see if the "engine" is right.I need your feedback, because
i'm interested in contribute with more related features as
described/requested on RFE #403310.
 - #1029275 at sf.net
Hope that helps,
Information Network for the Third Sector
I manage Helix Community, which makes pretty heavy use of Mailman as
integrated into GForge. I'm moderately familiar with Mailman code, and
pretty familiar with GForge. Of course, Perl is my native tongue, so
I'm equally uncomfortable in both codebases ;-)
Anyway, one thing that my users are constantly clamoring for is features
that would come from tighter integration between GForge and Mailman.
I've been mulling this over for a while, and it seems that deep
integration is limited by the way that most Mailman data is stored in
pickles. Since GForge is coded and pretty heavily bound to PHP.
My options for integration between the two seem to be:
1. Implement alternate GForge authentication mechanism in Mailman
2. Implement alternate, PHP-compatible storage mechanism (e.g. SQL
database) for everything currently stored in pickles
3. Implement pickle support in PHP
4. Implement IPC mechanism (e.g. SOAP, XML-RPC) as a Mailman control
daemon, and call that from GForge
I'm wondering if there are recommendations from this group. I'm also
wondering if there have been any movements/efforts in any of these
This is one of many problems that I plan to work on over time, and plan
to contribute patches to the extent that they are useful to a larger
community. If I'm lucky, I'll get budget to hire developers for this,
but for now, I'll be doing this on the cheap.
Rob Lanphier, Development Support Manager - RealNetworks
Helix Community: http://helixcommunity.org
I thought it would be valuable to communicate this to this group and if
it does not provoke any major outcry's then to the mail-users group a
For a long time our mailman RPM's have installed all of mailman under
/var/mailman (specifically both the prefix and with-var-prefix
parameters to configure were set to /var/mailman). This was a packaging
decision made before my tenure here and the rational for the decision
seems to be lost. My personal belief is once a decision is made for
where files live in a distribution there is much value in keeping that
consistent as users develop expectations on where to find files.
However, we are in the process of trying to make Linux much more secure
and a major component of that strategy is the introduction of a
technology called SELinux (Secure Linux). SELinux has at its heart the
"labeling" of files which give fine grained control over what actions
specific processes operating in certain "roles" can do. To make this
viable there is a tremendous advantage to having files installed in
canonical locations (at a minimum conforming to the FHS, the Filesystem
The previous choice of installing all of mailman, including the scripts,
libraries, executables, and cgi-bin which need to be locked down and
restricted for process execution into a filesystem root (/var) which is
designated to contain variable application data which is not executed
was creating security policy problems.
We have made a choice to move the non-data components of mailman to
/usr/lib/mailman by changing the prefix configure parameter (the
with-var-prefix remains set to /var/mailman). This is closer to what
some of the other distributions do.
We intend to introduce this change in the Fedora Core 3 release and the
RHEL 4 release.
Since there are a number of files that admins modify (config and
templates) and which the rpm installation process normally preserves on
upgrade they may get "burned" because the installer is not smart enough
to preserve those modified files across a new installation directory, or
may simply be confused on where to find files.
The installation directory change will appear in release notes and the
installation documentation (/usr/share/doc/mailman-*) however we all
know how much people read these things :-). So I thought this was a
valuable group to draw attention to this as its certain to come up as an
issue at some point. Also, if you see some fundamentally flawed reason
why this is a bad change now is the time to raise your concerns before
we advance out of the beta period.
When the release goes live I will send mail to mailman-users and the Red
Hat portion of the FAQ should be amended.
John Dennis <jdennis(a)redhat.com>
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:06:55 +0200
Brad Knowles <brad(a)stop.mail-abuse.org> wrote:
> At 11:01 AM +0530 2004-09-29, Karthikeyan wrote:
>> but i need to give a solution in the mailman, as the other party
>> would not want o fine tune theie lotus notes.
> It is not physically possible to solve this problem from within
Good reading on the background:
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw(a)kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
I'm trying to write a script where I can change the
default_member_moderation and accept-these_nonmembers objects, after a
new Mailman list is created automatically by a cron process. I've been
able to change the "default_member_moderation" as planned, but the
"accept_these_nonmembers" object I'm having troubles with. When I try
to add an email address, it shows up in the configuration like this:
How can I get the whole thing on one line. There's my python code
#Run this script with
#withlist -l -r change_values mylist
print 'LIST ', mlist.internal_name()
print ' Default Member Moderation Before: ',
print ' Accepted Non Members Before: ', mlist.accept_these_nonmembers
mlist.default_member_moderation = 1
mlist.accept_these_nonmembers = "root(a)mm.isu.edu'
print ' Default Member Moderation After: ',
print ' Accepted Non Members After: ', mlist.accept_these_nonmembers
The reason why I'm doing this is these lists have a different
configuration setup than what's in a default list that's setup with the
standard configuration in mm_cfg.py
Academic Computing Analyst Sr.
Everything must point to him.
Hi, I have problems with parsing a mail with
in fedora core 1.
This is the header and a few lines of body's mail:
From xxxx(a)xxxxx.org Thu Sep 23 17:16:30 2004 -0400
Received: from axxwxa.org ([126.96.36.199]) by dddddd.org with SMTP (List
Manager SOLARIS/SPARC version 4.2.1); Tue, 03 Sep 2002 13:50:45 -0400
Received: from exchange.dddd.org ([188.8.131.52]) by firewall.dddd.org
TP id <119042>; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 13:51:42 -0400
Received: by exchange.d.org with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id <RVWSCHY7>; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 13:46:01 -0400
From: Joel Anne Sweithelm <jdelm(a)afff.org>
To: "'dddd.ddd.(a)dcasd.cl'" <d(a)ldists.org>
Subject: A&WMA's 4th International Urban Forum
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 13:45:59 -0400
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From June 23-25, the Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA) held
International Urban Environmental Infrastructure Forum in Baltimore,
The problem is, that the body's mail start with a 'From ...' then arch
suppossed that is a new message and then strip in 2 files.
Can anyone help me, please.
We have a user who experiences intermittent problems with MM --
sometimes it sends, sometimes it does not. She has multiple lists, and
all the same problem. The only consistent issue I can see is that she
sends a lot of messages in French. Are there known issues with MM
dealing with non-US characters? Or could her ISP be messing with the
formatting somehow? I can't think of anything else. Any suggestions
would be most appreciated.
Marci O'Daffer, Managing Director