[Mailman-Users] query re "message has implicit destination"

[Mark Sapiro]

Bretton Vine wrote:

>Mark Sapiro said the following on 2006/08/31 01:22 AM:
>
>> Thus of your 3 examples above, if 'list' is the list posting address
>> that Mailman expects to see, only the 3rd example will be held for
>> implicit destination because in this and only this case, Mailman
>> doesn't see the list address as a recipient of the post.
>
>Aaaah, but that's the crux of the situation. I have read the documentation.
>I have searched the FAQs. I have asked the list and I keep getting the same
>answer: there is no obvious reason a {TO:listname,CC:thirdparty} post should
>result in the "message has implicit destination" error.
>
>However I am expected to provide one.


I understand and I sympathize.  In another life, I worked at a college.
The main user liason/applications programmer person for the student
information system used to refer the these kinds of things as being
caused by a 'poltergeist'. It drove me crazy, because I knew there was
a real explaination for every glitch, and I wanted to find it, but I
think the 'poltergeist' explaination worked for many of the users.


>I have an example of {TO:list1;BCC:list2} resulting in the administrative
>error so I know it works as it should. But I also have an example where I
>get that error without the different inputs and yet can't reproduce the
>error myself.
>
>If I'm being a bit anal it's because I need to be quite sure of myself if
>I'm going to suggest the problem exists between keyboard and chair ...
>
>> Further,
>> To: someone
>> Cc: list
>> will also be accepted.
>
>Yup, tested and it works. Except I have a message from a list-member that
>matches that setup and still resulted in the error indicated. Odd? I think
>so. Does the error lie with the system, no, I'm pretty sure it doesn't going
>by the useful input I've had. Thanks again :-)


Do you have an actual message? Where did this message come from? Is
this a message captured from the admindb interface, received from the
list after approval or sent to you after the fact? Or are you just
talking about the message without actually having it in hand?

Here's my advice for the next time if there is one. Examine the actual
message headers in the admindb interface and in addition to approving
the message, check the box to forward a copy to yourself. It would
have been really handy if you had done this with the original message,
but of course you had no way to know you would want/need this
information.

Also, you've probably already set require_explicit_destination off for
the list so there won't be a next time.

Hint - look at max_num_recipients before you get burned on that one too.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <msapiro at value.net>       The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan