Apologies for double posting. I sent this to the MM3 list by mistake earlier.
I'm hoping someone can shine a light on character encoding issue I've encountered.
A plain-text email with non-ascii characters in the body gets posted to the list.
As per Mark Sapiro's guide I've captured the incoming message to file.
The message is received by Mailman with the non-ascii characters displaying correctly.
The header of that message has:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
In the list's mbox file and archive webpage, the message displays the non-ascii characters correctly.
In the archive's downloaded .txt (and also .gz) file, the non-ascii characters are missing and displayed as "?".
I've copied the message text in below, from both the correct one from the email and the erroneous .txt file. Hopefully they won't get scrambled up when I send this.
Any advice on getting the non-ascii characters written into the archive .txt file would be gratefully received.
=== Message text as okay in mbox and as shown on the archive webpage ===
If one goes by the definition of veḷippaṭai as given in the Tamil Lexicon that the meaning of an ambiguous word should be disambiguated by a qualifying word, then aruvi āmpal does not conform to that definition since in the case of aruvi āmpal in Patiṟṟuppattu 63, aruvi is really made up of aru+vi, a compound. Moreover, the expression aṭai aṭuppu aṟiyā is already there to clarify that āmpal is a number and not a flower. Thus, aruvi simply provides information in addition to aṭai aṭuppu aṟiyā that āmpal is not a flower. The modern commentator Aruḷampalavaṉār also does not call it veḷippaṭai.
=== Message text with missing characters in te archive's txt and gz downloads ==
If one goes by the definition of ve?ippa?ai as given in the Tamil Lexicon that the meaning of an ambiguous word should be disambiguated by a qualifying word, then aruvi ?mpal does not conform to that definition since in the case of aruvi ?mpal in Pati??uppattu 63, aruvi is really made up of aru+vi, a compound. Moreover, the expression a?ai a?uppu a?iy? is already there to clarify that ?mpal is a number and not a flower. Thus, aruvi simply provides information in addition to a?ai a?uppu a?iy? that ?mpal is not a flower. The modern commentator Aru?ampalava??r also does not call it ve?ippa?ai.
I figured there is not a way to do this but thought I would ask.
We usually don’t want archives on our lists (do not want to deal with archives), but want a way to see what lists are not being used. Is there a way to see list activity like last message for a list? Not even content of the message maybe just when the list last processed a message. I have come across lists that users are not using so I would like to be able to audit to see when a list was last used. We are on mailman2 but going to mailman3.
I've been using Mailman 2.1 for ages and I love it but recently I have a
problem with thousands of messages per day from spammers sending
On the Privacy options section I set 'advertised' to 'No' and
'subscribe_policy' to 'Require approval' but that doesn't work to stop
the subscription emails.
Is there a way to make a list 'invite only'? I tried to find such an
option but was unable to do so...
John Elliot V
|_|_|O| Because every programmer needs a good club!
I think I know what is happening , but I want to make sure. A bunch of my list admins are getting bounces like below?
I think it is someone or probably a BOT, trying to subscribe to our lists, But they are using a bad email address so it bounces to the admin. (Our lists are set to confirm/approve for joining). I assume they are just trying to join any lists that don’t have confirm/approve to see if they can then get the users of the list, maybe, What else could they be trying to do?
I have seen a couple of different bad emails addresses used, so I just can’t ban this one, I am telling list admins to ignore them. But if they get worse I think they can set this setting to “NO”
Should Mailman send you, the list owner, any bounce messages that failed to be detected by the bounce processor? Yes is recommended.
(Details for bounce_unrecognized_goes_to_list_owner)
Which would stop these notifications? But it is recommended to leave it to “yes”.
Any other options ideas? Am I on the right track?
Here is a bounce example with our list info stripped.
Error: Invalid user address
Error message below:
550 - Requested action not taken: no such user here
Subject: confirm 174c7e02aa6603b72ba30e59c5e24c7fceebd826
Sent date: Wed Apr 14 23:08:48 UTC 2021
MAIL FROM: XXX-software-XXX-bounces(a)mailman.XXX.XXX
RCPT TO: 17323547559(a)vtext.com<mailto:email@example.com>
< XXX-software-XXX-request@ mailman.XXX.XXX >
Size: 11.3 KiB
I think I have a situation where someone is sending email to one of my lists request address ie (lista-requests(a)domain.com<mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>) from an invalid email address (maybe spoofing the sending address). Or they may be able to trying to subscribe and entering an invalid email address on the wbesite.
So what happens is the list admins gets a bunch of bounces. What is the best way to stop this? If I add an email to the ban section for a list, will mailman drop any email or requests from them if they are spoofing as a sender or trying to subscribe?
This is a little embarrassing, but I thought y'all might deserve a
heads-up. Note, this is not a bug, except in my brain. And maybe
yours but probably not ;-).
A couple years ago I converted my Mailman 2 site from HTTP to HTTPS.
The site is visible externally to my university, thus HTTPS, but
almost entirely used for announcements, which partly explains how I
missed this (more on that later). I tried to release a held message
from the moderation page, and this failed repeatedly. Eventually I
realized that I wasn't getting a response page at all. I'm guessing
that what happened is this:
1. I added a virtual host on :443 in my Apache server config to
accept Mailman requests via HTTPS (the rest of the URLs are the
2. I added a global redirect rule that returns a redirect of every
HTTP request as an https: URL.
3. The request for moderation action gets redirected, invalidating
the CSRF cookie.
4. The redirected request has an invalid cookie, which gets ignored,
and it is discarded.
The fix is obvious: run bin/fix_url.py on all my lists.
You're allowed to laugh now, but try to not scare the fish. :-)
How I missed this, and you might too: because these are announcement
list configured to my normal usage, there's very little in the way of
web interaction on the moderation side, but list configuration works,
so I didn't notice it there. (I caught it this time because I got
moderated due to a very large post.) I don't understand why
moderation fails but list configuration works in my configuration (the
list configuration pages also have CSRF cookies).
If you care, ask and I'll figure it out. I probably should figure it
out since it suggests that some CSRF cookies may persist for more than
one request, or Mailman may somehow reissue the CSRF cookie in some
circumstances. Explanations that save me the effort appreciated! ;-)
To the Mailman community,
The GNU Mailman Steering Committee condemns the reinstatement of
Richard M. Stallman (RMS) to the Board of the Free Software Foundation
(FSF), and has taken the following actions:
1. On behalf of the GNU Mailman project, signed the letter on
GitHub calling for the removal of the entire FSF Board, as well
as RMS himself.
2. Started exploring ways to move our financial assets, for decades
managed by the FSF, to new management. The management fees are
small, but this is an important symbolic protest.
3. Started exploring how to leave the GNU Project. On the one hand,
if we leave but GNU wants to maintain a "GNU Mailman" project, we
cannot stop them, confusing users. On the other hand, RMS is
leader of the GNU Project, and has intervened in Mailman affairs
on many occasions. We should forestall this in the future.
We wish to explain our actions to the community.
Although free exchange of software among users is a practice that goes
back to days of the earliest general purpose computers, RMS was the
first to propose a complete free software distribution, and is the
acknowledged founder of the Free Software movement. Even leaders of
the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) acknowledge this. We all owe
him a debt for this.
Nevertheless, the movement has matured and thrived, spawning the
competitive open source movement, with whose philosophy Mailman is
more closely aligned. While we acknowledge our debt to RMS, we don't
need him any longer. And unfortunately, he has become both a symbol
and a source of the toxicity in tech communities. The FSF Board did
the right thing by accepting RMS's resignation. They did the wrong
thing by reinstating him.
RMS has a long history of abusive behavior and toxic political
positions. A small part of it is described in the open letter on
GitHub and its references, and several members of the Steering
Committee have observed it directly. All of us have heard stories
directly from those who were abused or observed it directly. His
political positions are public, for example his support of pedophiles.
He claims that he in no way supports abusive relationships with
children, yet refuses to acknowledge that children are generally in
no position to provide consent, an evasive and highly toxic position.
There is no question: RMS is toxic.
We came for mailing list management, but we stayed for the community.
We have a right to protect our community by dissociating it from toxic
We do not want our project associated with such a person, nor to
provide economic resources to organizations that promote him to
leadership positions. We are taking these actions to protect our
community, both the narrow community of Mailman developers and users,
and the broader open source community, from his toxic behavior and
from the reputational damage that will come from helping to enable
While we have no information suggesting that other members of the FSF
Board are similarly toxic as individuals, as a group they enabled RMS
for decades, and now have taken an explicit step in enabling him
again. If they want to regain their position of respect and
acceptance in our community, they must acknowledge their error, and we
don't see -- given their reinstatement of RMS himself -- how they can
do so convincingly while maintaining their positions on the Board.
They must resign, and a new Board composed, to demonstrate their
sincerity. What they do is up to them, of course, but if they do not
take radical steps, we will continue to consider association with the
FSF a threat to our community.
For the Mailman community,
Abhilash Raj (project leader)
Stephen J. Turnbull
John Viega (founder)
 Text and signatures: https://rms-open-letter.github.io
 Appendix to the letter: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix
Related statements: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/statements
l am mildly familiar with withlist and python but my google-fu today is weak, I haven’t found any example of this. The setting is ‘accept_these_nonmembers’ which I’m assuming is stored as a list in the database; do I need to retrieve it and append the new addresses to it?
Can anyone point me to an example of doing something like this (or better, point me to one someone else has already made! )
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs
I am not sure how many messages they linked but I suspect it is a lot. They have lists they use for their groups, and will link to the messages on their internal website. But if that is the only option then that is what they will need to do if they want to keep the links.