On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
>> Their servers, their rules.
>>
>> Deal with it.
>
> Frankly, I can't. Having to use a GUI mail client makes participation in the
> 100+ mailing lists that I contribute code and provide assistance on
> completely untenable.
That's funny, Pine works perfe
Not top posted, see below.
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 08:12:28AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
> > FYI: About 10 minutes ago, I posted a test message to the list from a
> > Mutt client. My mail server logs verify that the message was
> > received by so
On Saturday 29 July 2006 01:27, Jo Rhett wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > OK, here is one piece of useful info: I just posted to bacula-users
> > using a
> > GNU Emacs mail client, connecting to a sendmail mail server that is
> > behind a
> > firewall. The messag
On Jul 28, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Richard Mortimer wrote:
> The important thing is the SMTP envelope address that is presented
> to sourceforge
> and not the original envelope generated by the sender. As I
> understand it
> sf just checks whether the mail servers for your domain will accept
> mail
On Jul 28, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Martin Simmons wrote:
> OK, here is one piece of useful info: I just posted to bacula-users
> using a
> GNU Emacs mail client, connecting to a sendmail mail server that is
> behind a
> firewall. The message was accepted by sourceforge and delivered
> back to me
>
On Jul 28, 2006, at 1:04 PM, DAve wrote:
> I was confronted with the same problem back in 1998 and I used
> ssmtp. I
> think it was ssmtp, that was a long time ago. I set it up and
> continued
> to use Mutt (which is still my favorite MUA though I have to use OE
> and
> Thunderbird now) with
On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 21:39 +0100, Martin Simmons wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:04:27 -0400, DAve said:
> >
> > Jo Rhett wrote:
> > >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
> > >>> This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
> > >>> have ever seen.
> >
> > I was co
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 09:54:15AM -0700, Jo Rhett wrote:
> Frankly, I can't. Having to use a GUI mail client makes
> participation in the 100+ mailing lists that I contribute code and
> provide assistance on completely untenable.
Hmmm. I guess I don't understand the issue. I use mutt, and
Martin Simmons wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:04:27 -0400, DAve said:
>> Jo Rhett wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
> This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
> have ever seen.
On Jul 28, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Alan Brown wrote:
Their ser
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:04:27 -0400, DAve said:
>
> Jo Rhett wrote:
> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
> >>> This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
> >>> have ever seen.
> >> On Jul 28, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Alan Brown wrote:
> >> Their servers, their rules.
>
Jo Rhett wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
>>> This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
>>> have ever seen.
>> On Jul 28, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Alan Brown wrote:
>> Their servers, their rules.
>>
>> Deal with it.
>
> Frankly, I can't. Having to use a GUI mail cl
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
>> This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
>> have ever seen.
>
> On Jul 28, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Alan Brown wrote:
> Their servers, their rules.
>
> Deal with it.
Frankly, I can't. Having to use a GUI mail client makes
participatio
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
> This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
> have ever seen.
Their servers, their rules.
Deal with it.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Jo
This has to rank as one of the stupidest spam detection measures I
have ever seen.
So apparently, one cannot read mailing lists from a host behind a
firewall any longer?
I mean seriously, this ranks so high that I simply cannot think of a
more useless spam prevention method. It will reduce
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 08:12:28AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
> FYI: About 10 minutes ago, I posted a test message to the list from a
> Mutt client. My mail server logs verify that the message was
> received by sourceforge:
I've run into this problem as well. It seems that Mailman has a
spam-a
FYI: About 10 minutes ago, I posted a test message to the list from a
Mutt client. My mail server logs verify that the message was
received by sourceforge:
Jul 24 07:57:34 m21 postfix/smtp[18894]: 3B97EBF58: to=, relay=205.150.199.217[205.150.199.217],
delay=3, status=sent (250 2.6.0 Ok, id=15
16 matches
Mail list logo
