[Mailman-Users] Mailman roadmap
mkabot at soarol.com
Tue Jul 10 20:52:44 CEST 2007
Thanks. I didn't expect it to move from its current 3.0 slot, just adding a
+1 for its importance.
I have multiple domains working by doing some "preprocessing" before
Mailman. I tried the various patches and none worked well. My method makes
sure I can use the most current Mailman release without have to modify any
I concatenate the list name the user enters with their unique customer ID
and then hand that guaranteed unique list name to mailman. I then add Qmail
forwards within their domain for the list name to the list name w/
concatenation. It has solved my problem in the short term but has the
disadvantage that users see the list concatenation name in email headers.
I would love to help, but afraid my Python experience is non existent. I
fondly remember my Xerox PARC friends coding away in Python while I was
using Perl, PHP, and C/C++ .....
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Brad Knowles [mailto:brad at shub-internet.org]
| Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 12:16 PM
| To: mkabot at soarol.com; mailman-users at python.org
| Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman roadmap
| On 7/9/07, Michael Kabot wrote:
| > I'd like to add a +1 for multiple domain support as well.
| Barry's answered this one. All desires aside, the only real
| solutions we've found for this problem require some pretty massive
| architectural changes, at which point we're right back where we
| started from with Mailman 3.0.
| Try the unsupported patches. If you're a programmer, make some code
| changes. If you can show us a suitable answer to this problem that
| doesn't require massive architectural changes, it will get serious
| So far, that's the best answer that anyone can give.
| Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
| LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
| Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>
| 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
More information about the Mailman-Users