Matthew Miller writes:
> On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 12:43:02PM -0700, stan via devel wrote:
> > To each their own, of course, but there was a long discussion of
> > discourse here a while ago. I tried it out, but it was like a bad
> > version of a mailing list. It sent me a mail informing me tha
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 12:43:02PM -0700, stan via devel wrote:
> To each their own, of course, but there was a long discussion of
> discourse here a while ago. I tried it out, but it was like a bad
> version of a mailing list. It sent me a mail informing me that there
> were messages to read. T
On May 5, 2019 9:43:02 PM GMT+02:00, stan via devel
wrote:
>On Sun, 5 May 2019 14:19:59 +0200
>Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>
>> Hello, qrsBRWN.
>>
>> Sun, 05 May 2019 10:57:06 +0200 you wrote:
>>
>> > Exactly what platform did you have in mind?
>>
>> Discourse[1] for example. GTK deve
On Sunday, May 5, 2019 3:43:02 PM EDT stan via devel wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2019 14:19:59 +0200
> Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > Hello, qrsBRWN.
> >
> > Sun, 05 May 2019 10:57:06 +0200 you wrote:
> >
> > > Exactly what platform did you have in mind?
> >
> > Discourse[1] for example. GTK
On Sun, 5 May 2019 14:19:59 +0200
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> Hello, qrsBRWN.
>
> Sun, 05 May 2019 10:57:06 +0200 you wrote:
>
> > Exactly what platform did you have in mind?
>
> Discourse[1] for example. GTK developers already testing it[2] as
> mailing lists replacement.
>
> 1: http
On 5/4/19 11:04 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
That's why it's time to deprecate all mailing lists and switch to modern
Web 2.0 platforms.
I swear I've intended this as a joke, before reading replies
and realizing it was supposed to be serious.
Regards.
--
Roberto Ragusamail at ro
Hello, qrsBRWN.
Sun, 05 May 2019 10:57:06 +0200 you wrote:
> Exactly what platform did you have in mind?
Discourse[1] for example. GTK developers already testing it[2] as
mailing lists replacement.
1: https://github.com/discourse/discourse
2: https://blog.gtk.org/2019/03/05/testing-discourse-fo
On May 4, 2019 11:04:51 PM GMT+02:00, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
>Hello, Stephen J. Turnbull.
>
>Sun, 5 May 2019 05:58:48 +0900 you wrote:
>
>> As a Mailman developer, I
>> will strongly oppose turning on user choice by default because my
>> constituents are list owners, not subscribers.
Hello, Stephen J. Turnbull.
Sun, 5 May 2019 05:58:48 +0900 you wrote:
> As a Mailman developer, I
> will strongly oppose turning on user choice by default because my
> constituents are list owners, not subscribers. But that implies it
> would be rarely available.
That's why it's time to deprec
Florian Weimer writes:
> Based on some reports, I don't think this is how the Gmail
> implementation works. It will discard mailing list mail for senders
> with a DMARC policy that does not set p=reject, too.
Based on conversations with GMail developers, that has nothing to do
with DMARC, tho
Vitaly Zaitsev via devel writes:
> I think it should be an option in mailman's settings. Each user can
> enable or disable mitigations for his email address.
Patches welcome at GNU Mailman.
Potential time waste warning: The list owner must have the choice
whether to delegate the choice to subs
Hello, Kevin Fenzi.
Wed, 1 May 2019 08:43:23 -0700 you wrote:
> I guess I will enable the From field mitigation for this list, but I
> will not like it.
Now it should work fine. Thanks.
I think it should be an option in mailman's settings. Each user can
enable or disable mitigations for his ema
* Tom Hughes:
> On 02/05/2019 09:21, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Stephen J. Turnbull:
>>
>>> It's possible to do this only for domains that advertise p=reject.
>>> They deserve what they get.
>>>
>>> If there are any issues that seem like they can be addressed in
>>> upstream GNU Mailman (unfortuna
On 02/05/2019 09:21, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Stephen J. Turnbull:
It's possible to do this only for domains that advertise p=reject.
They deserve what they get.
If there are any issues that seem like they can be addressed in
upstream GNU Mailman (unfortunately, we don't carry a stick big enoug
* Stephen J. Turnbull:
> It's possible to do this only for domains that advertise p=reject.
> They deserve what they get.
>
> If there are any issues that seem like they can be addressed in
> upstream GNU Mailman (unfortunately, we don't carry a stick big enough
> to convince blockheaded mail doma
On 5/1/19 12:06 PM, Björn Persson wrote:
> Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>> Kevin Fenzi writes:
>> > I guess I will enable the From field mitigation for this list, but I
>> > will not like it. ;)
>>
>> It's possible to do this only for domains that advertise p=reject.
>
> Yes please, don't break
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi writes:
> > I guess I will enable the From field mitigation for this list, but I
> > will not like it. ;)
>
> It's possible to do this only for domains that advertise p=reject.
Yes please, don't break things more than what's necessary.
Björn Persson
Kevin Fenzi writes:
> On 4/30/19 4:46 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev wrote:
> > Hello all!
> >
> > Currently Fedora mailing lists use "From" field from original messages
> > and if sender's domain use DMARC=reject policy, mailing lists
> > subscribers cannot receive any messages from such users because
On 4/30/19 4:46 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev wrote:
> Hello all!
>
> Currently Fedora mailing lists use "From" field from original messages
> and if sender's domain use DMARC=reject policy, mailing lists
> subscribers cannot receive any messages from such users because their MX
> servers follow DMARC proced
* Vitaly Zaitsev:
> Currently Fedora mailing lists use "From" field from original messages
> and if sender's domain use DMARC=reject policy, mailing lists
> subscribers cannot receive any messages from such users because their MX
> servers follow DMARC procedure and drop them.
>
> Previously I ope
20 matches
Mail list logo
