![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ab1c33fc0fd591a0ea174155233a6a51.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
I've just uploaded the Mailman 2.0 beta 1 tarball to www.list.org. I decided to name the new version "2.0" because of the architectural changes that have been made. See the excerpt from the NEWS file below for details of what's changed since version 1.1.
Two important things to take note of. You will need Python 1.5.2 to run this version of Mailman. Also, if you are upgrading from Mailman 1.x you will need to read the UPGRADING file for instructions.
I don't plan to make wider release announcements until 2.0 final is ready to go, but I also don't expect the beta cycle to be very long. We'll see!
Enjoy, -Barry
-------------------- snip snip --------------------
A new bundled auto-responder has been added. You can now configure an autoresponse text for each list's primary addresses:
listname@yourhost.com -- the general posting address listname-request@... -- the automated "request bot" address listname-admin@... -- the human administrator address
The standard UI now includes three logos at the bottom of the page: Dragon's Mailman logo, the Python Powered logo, and the GNU logo. All point to their respective home pages.
It is now possible to set the Reply-To: field on lists to an arbitrary address. NOTE: Reply-To: munging is generally considered harmful! However for some read-only lists, it is useful to direct replies to a parallel discussion list.
There is a new message delivery architecture which uses a pipeline processor for incoming and internally generated messages. Mailman no longer contains a bundled bulk-mailer; instead message delivery is handled completely by the MTA. Most MTAs give a high enough priority to connections from the localhost that mail will not be lost because of system load, but this is not guaranteed (or handled) by Mailman currently. Be careful also if your smtpd is on a different host than the Mailman host. In practice, mail lossage has not be observed.
For this reason cron/run_queue is no longer needed (see the UPGRADING file for details).
Also, you can choose whether you want direct smtp delivery, or delivery via the command line to a sendmail-compatible daemon. You can also easily add your own delivery module. See Mailman/Defaults.py for details.
A similar pipeline architecture for the parsing of bounce messages has been added. Most common bounce formats are now handled, including Qmail, Postfix, and DSN. It is now much easier to add new bounce detectors.
The approval pending architecture has also been revamped. Subscription requests and message posts waiting for admin approval are no longer kept in the config.db file, but in a separate requests.db file instead.
Finally made consistent the use of Sender:/From:/From_ in the matching of headers for such things as member-post-only. Now, if USE_ENVELOPE_SENDER is true, Sender: will always be chosen over From:, however the default has been changed to USE_ENVELOPE_SENDER false so that From: is always chosen over Sender:. In both cases, if no header is found, From_ (i.e. the envelope sender is used). Note that the variable is now misnamed! Most people want From: matching anyway and any are easily spoofable.
New scripts bin/move_list, bin/config_list
cron/upvolumes_yearly, cron/upvolumes_monthly, cron/archive, cron/run_queue all removed. Edit your crontab if you used these scripts. Other scripts removed: contact_transport, deliver, dumb_deliver.
Several web UI improvements, especially in the admin page.
Remove X-pmrqc: headers to prevent return reciepts for Pegasus mail users.
Security patch when using external archivers.
Honor "X-Archive: No" header by not putting this message in the archive.
Changes to the log file format.
The usual bug fixes.
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/424104b8bb6aaf618a9f4c923544c60c.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 11:53:49PM -0500, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
I've just uploaded the Mailman 2.0 beta 1 tarball to www.list.org. I
You know what really bugs me: It's called mailman.tar.gz
Why on earth can't you just encode the version in the name like everybody does -- I mean, the subdir is called mailman-2.0beta1, why not call the binary mailman-2.0beta1.tar.gz then?
decided to name the new version "2.0" because of the architectural changes that have been made. See the excerpt from the NEWS file below for details of what's changed since version 1.1.
What happened to 1.2 ? I've got 1.1 installed, updated via CVS to mailman-1.2b1 and now we have 2.0 ? =:)
-- Ralf Hildebrandt <R.Hildebrandt@tu-bs.de> www.stahl.bau.tu-bs.de/~hildeb In brightest day, in blackest night no evil shall escape my sight!
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ef0f76e5aa090db0457e457f735ccb59.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Why on earth can't you just encode the version in the name like everybody does -- I mean, the subdir is called mailman-2.0beta1, why not call the [...tar file...] mailman-2.0beta1.tar.gz then?
That's yet another reason to prefer GNU software to commericial stuff like mailman. GNU has a standard for the name of tar files:
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_48.html#SEC48
<quote>
"Package the distribution of Foo version 69.96 up in a gzipped
tar file with the name foo-69.96.tar.gz'. It should unpack into a subdirectory named
foo-69.96'.
</quote>
Have a great weekend everyone! --tal
P.S. YES, I WAS KIDDING WHEN I SAID MAILMAN WAS COMMERCIAL SOFTWARE!
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/424104b8bb6aaf618a9f4c923544c60c.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 12:53:00PM -0500, Tom Limoncelli wrote:
Why on earth can't you just encode the version in the name like everybody does -- I mean, the subdir is called mailman-2.0beta1, why not call the [...tar file...] mailman-2.0beta1.tar.gz then?
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_48.html#SEC48
<quote> "Package the distribution of Foo version 69.96 up in a gzipped tar file with the name
foo-69.96.tar.gz'. It should unpack into a subdirectory named
foo-69.96'. </quote>
I rest my case :)
-- Ralf Hildebrandt <R.Hildebrandt@tu-bs.de> www.stahl.bau.tu-bs.de/~hildeb
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ab1c33fc0fd591a0ea174155233a6a51.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
"RH" == Ralf Hildebrandt <R.Hildebrandt@tu-bs.de> writes:
RH> You know what really bugs me: It's called mailman.tar.gz
Try http://www.list.org/mailman-2.0beta1.tgz. mailman.tar.gz is just symlinked to this (or whatever the latest tarball is). This works better for people who have automated scripts that suck distributions down because they don't have to change their script each time. You can even get older tarballs if you decode the naming scheme and guess at a URL. :)
RH> What happened to 1.2 ? I've got 1.1 installed, updated via CVS
RH> to mailman-1.2b1 and now we have 2.0 ? =:)
Sounds like you're not on mailman-developers. Read this.
http://www.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2000-March/001911.html
-Barry
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e542859f7cf390bcbcfd1957aa86eaf9.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
bwarsaw@cnri.reston.va.us wrote:
"RH" == Ralf Hildebrandt <R.Hildebrandt@tu-bs.de> writes:
RH> You know what really bugs me: It's called mailman.tar.gz
Try http://www.list.org/mailman-2.0beta1.tgz. mailman.tar.gz is just symlinked to this (or whatever the latest tarball is). This works better for people who have automated scripts that suck distributions down because they don't have to change their script each time. You can even get older tarballs if you decode the naming scheme and guess at a URL. :)
A gracious response to a pretty ungrateful complaint...
Chill, Ralf, and make sure you've got a leg to stand on...
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/424104b8bb6aaf618a9f4c923544c60c.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 11:53:49PM -0500, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
- cron/upvolumes_yearly, cron/upvolumes_monthly, cron/archive, cron/run_queue all removed. Edit your crontab if you used these scripts. Other scripts removed: contact_transport, deliver, dumb_deliver.
I did't see that mentioned in UPGRADING
-- Ralf Hildebrandt <R.Hildebrandt@tu-bs.de> www.stahl.bau.tu-bs.de/~hildeb "The percentage of users running Windows NT Workstation 4.0 whose PCs stopped working more than once a month was less than half that of Windows 95 users."-- microsoft.com/ntworkstation/overview/Reliability/Highest.asp
participants (5)
-
Barry A. Warsaw
-
bwarsaw@cnri.reston.va.us
-
Dan Mick
-
Ralf Hildebrandt
-
Tom Limoncelli