hi all.
after moving a mailinglist from one domain to another, i was wondering how i can keep the old List-ID (according to RFC2919 the List-ID (or the address-part therein) should not change, even if the list-address changes)
i have found an open bug-report regarding this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/266142
but no solution. is there one? preferrably without having to hack the sources :-)
fgmasdr IOhannes
-- IEM - network operation center mailto:noc@iem.at
IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m zmoelnig) wrote:
Correct. It SHOULD not change, but it MAY. It is not desirable, but it is permissible.
The only solution that doesn't involve hacking code is to not change the host_name of the list, but since the host_name is the domain that is exposed in all list email addresses, that is clearly not a practical solution.
Otherwise, you'd need to modify Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py in some way.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mark Sapiro wrote:
are there any plans to allow an administrator to set the List-ID in future versions of Mailman?
i would love to see that. (that is, it would be sufficient for me to be able to set the listid (address) part of it)
Otherwise, you'd need to modify Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py in some way.
this is a somewhat unpractical, esp. since (i guess) many people install mailman via a package-manager and want to stay up-to-date with respect to bug-fixes,...; hacking the (pre-packaged) code is always a nightmare in such situations.... however, iirc there was a custom hook support....(?)
mfga,.sdr IOhannes
-- IEM - network operation center mailto:noc@iem.at
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 2, 2009, at 11:17 AM, IEM - network operating center (IOhannes
m zmoelnig) wrote:
are there any plans to allow an administrator to set the List-ID in
future versions of Mailman?
It's not out of the realm of possibility for MM3. It seems to me on
the order of browser ID hacking.
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmsBy0ACgkQ2YZpQepbvXFccQCfWixGfFKUihXe9z2egv8IWk3S aVYAn2OPwlOqL9U+lM1srZhrSPZDmUbQ =QjKt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 2, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Yep, and exposing it in the u/i.
What I meant was, it kind of feels like masquerading.
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmsGOoACgkQ2YZpQepbvXHZnACfcsCBR7lJ8XALVaz02vUN9lTL 33sAoISpjSiD7Sz9Zvl0ni+km5H5k4DE =a+ps -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Barry Warsaw writes:
On Mar 2, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I disagree. The identity of a list is what it is, and shouldn't change because the server changes. The issue here arises because in Mailman 2.1, lists have no sense of their own identity<wink>, and rely on their association with a server to derive an identity. So by providing this feature we're not hiding ID to placate the outside world, we're *exposing* ID to improve reliability.
While Mark is correct that the RFC says "SHOULD", and so it's optional if tools like Mailman find the implementation painful, I would say this is a MUST for MM3, and deserves consideration as a SHOULD for MM2.2.
It's not obvious that it even needs be exposed in the UI for MM2. Moving servers is something that requires intervention by somebody with root access, so command-line configuration is sufficient for MM2, I think.
AFAIK there are no tools out there that depend on continuity of List-Id (except user filters, and even those may continue to work by and large if they match on the mailbox rather than the full ID), so I wouldn't call it "urgent", even for MM3.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 2, 2009, at 9:23 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
What I'm saying is that the RFC states "While it is perfectly
acceptable for a list identifier to be completely independent of the
domain name of the host machine servicing the mailing list, the owner
of a mailing list MUST NOT generate list identifiers in any domain
namespace for which they do not have authority."
So, if you're moving a list from one domain to another, and you want
to keep your old List-ID, you must still control the old domain. If
not, then ISTM you MUST change the List-ID. In certain environments,
I think you can trust the list admins to get this right, but in others
you might trust only the site administrators. So how much control do
you give to list admins?
The core question is whether /someone/ should be able to (easily) set
the List-ID, and I think we agree the answer to that is "yes". You
state that command-line configuration would be fine for MM2, and I
agree with that too. :) I still think the posting address makes for a
fine default value (well, s/@/./ of course).
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmstKQACgkQ2YZpQepbvXHqywCeNXpqA/gFjFnPMyIUbr8ndMJ9 a3gAn2DxEwPge+X6+r/ZI200f/y6GUoq =ZceU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 3, 2009, at 4:43 AM, IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m
zmoelnig) wrote:
It's now in the Mailman 3 trunk. :)
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmtShUACgkQ2YZpQepbvXEgGgCfdJ6qX/eNLxfo0x7TlQPzmDyf 33EAniZsMo+VmE901snyZkavGYy2QCH7 =wFnx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m zmoelnig) wrote:
Yes, you could make a custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9> and add it to the pipeline after CookHeaders to change the List-ID: header.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m zmoelnig) wrote:
Correct. It SHOULD not change, but it MAY. It is not desirable, but it is permissible.
The only solution that doesn't involve hacking code is to not change the host_name of the list, but since the host_name is the domain that is exposed in all list email addresses, that is clearly not a practical solution.
Otherwise, you'd need to modify Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py in some way.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mark Sapiro wrote:
are there any plans to allow an administrator to set the List-ID in future versions of Mailman?
i would love to see that. (that is, it would be sufficient for me to be able to set the listid (address) part of it)
Otherwise, you'd need to modify Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py in some way.
this is a somewhat unpractical, esp. since (i guess) many people install mailman via a package-manager and want to stay up-to-date with respect to bug-fixes,...; hacking the (pre-packaged) code is always a nightmare in such situations.... however, iirc there was a custom hook support....(?)
mfga,.sdr IOhannes
-- IEM - network operation center mailto:noc@iem.at
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 2, 2009, at 11:17 AM, IEM - network operating center (IOhannes
m zmoelnig) wrote:
are there any plans to allow an administrator to set the List-ID in
future versions of Mailman?
It's not out of the realm of possibility for MM3. It seems to me on
the order of browser ID hacking.
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmsBy0ACgkQ2YZpQepbvXFccQCfWixGfFKUihXe9z2egv8IWk3S aVYAn2OPwlOqL9U+lM1srZhrSPZDmUbQ =QjKt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 2, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Yep, and exposing it in the u/i.
What I meant was, it kind of feels like masquerading.
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmsGOoACgkQ2YZpQepbvXHZnACfcsCBR7lJ8XALVaz02vUN9lTL 33sAoISpjSiD7Sz9Zvl0ni+km5H5k4DE =a+ps -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Barry Warsaw writes:
On Mar 2, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I disagree. The identity of a list is what it is, and shouldn't change because the server changes. The issue here arises because in Mailman 2.1, lists have no sense of their own identity<wink>, and rely on their association with a server to derive an identity. So by providing this feature we're not hiding ID to placate the outside world, we're *exposing* ID to improve reliability.
While Mark is correct that the RFC says "SHOULD", and so it's optional if tools like Mailman find the implementation painful, I would say this is a MUST for MM3, and deserves consideration as a SHOULD for MM2.2.
It's not obvious that it even needs be exposed in the UI for MM2. Moving servers is something that requires intervention by somebody with root access, so command-line configuration is sufficient for MM2, I think.
AFAIK there are no tools out there that depend on continuity of List-Id (except user filters, and even those may continue to work by and large if they match on the mailbox rather than the full ID), so I wouldn't call it "urgent", even for MM3.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 2, 2009, at 9:23 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
What I'm saying is that the RFC states "While it is perfectly
acceptable for a list identifier to be completely independent of the
domain name of the host machine servicing the mailing list, the owner
of a mailing list MUST NOT generate list identifiers in any domain
namespace for which they do not have authority."
So, if you're moving a list from one domain to another, and you want
to keep your old List-ID, you must still control the old domain. If
not, then ISTM you MUST change the List-ID. In certain environments,
I think you can trust the list admins to get this right, but in others
you might trust only the site administrators. So how much control do
you give to list admins?
The core question is whether /someone/ should be able to (easily) set
the List-ID, and I think we agree the answer to that is "yes". You
state that command-line configuration would be fine for MM2, and I
agree with that too. :) I still think the posting address makes for a
fine default value (well, s/@/./ of course).
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmstKQACgkQ2YZpQepbvXHqywCeNXpqA/gFjFnPMyIUbr8ndMJ9 a3gAn2DxEwPge+X6+r/ZI200f/y6GUoq =ZceU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Mar 3, 2009, at 4:43 AM, IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m
zmoelnig) wrote:
It's now in the Mailman 3 trunk. :)
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkmtShUACgkQ2YZpQepbvXEgGgCfdJ6qX/eNLxfo0x7TlQPzmDyf 33EAniZsMo+VmE901snyZkavGYy2QCH7 =wFnx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m zmoelnig) wrote:
Yes, you could make a custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9> and add it to the pipeline after CookHeaders to change the List-ID: header.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
participants (4)
-
Barry Warsaw -
IEM - network operating center (IOhannes m zmoelnig) -
Mark Sapiro -
Stephen J. Turnbull