Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Mailman-Users] moderation rejection notices, etc.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/56955/56955022e6aae170f66577e20fb3ce4d8949255c" alt=""
Michael Welch wrote:
Brad has already responded to 1., 3. and 4. As far as 2. is concerned, you raise a good point, although you mean the messages should be From: listname-owner@.... listname-admin@... is actually a deprecated synonym for listname-bounces@...
I don't think there is a good reason for the reject to come from listname-bounces@....
This came about in the implementation of automated bounce processing in Mailman 2.1. Prior to 2.1, the list owner address was listname-admin@.... This address was also used as the envelope sender of messages so bounces would return to the list owner for attention. With automated bounce processing, the envelope sender was changed to listname-bounces@..., and the listname-admin@..., was deprecated in favor of listname-owner@... and processed the same as listname-bounces@....
At that point, the processing of refusal messages was changed. The intent was that replies go to the owner. In fact the log message for the change says
__refuse(): In the refuse.txt, use the -owner address as the %(adminaddr)s expansion so that when the human acts on this message, they'll contact a human without going through the bounce processor.
The actual change <http://mailman.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mailman?view=rev&revision=5019> changed the address inserted into the text of the refusal to the listname-owner@... address, but it changed the From: to the listname-bounces@... address.
I think this was a mistake. I'm Ccing mailman-developers in case someone remembers some reason for this, but barring objection, I'll change it for the next release.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
participants (1)
-
Mark Sapiro