-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> I know, since some Mailinglist I am on are migrated to Majordomo2.
>> Afaik does Mailman not support the "nomail" Option.
>
> BTW, majordomo may not support 'nomail', but it does allow you to add
> additional email addresses to a primary email, wh
On Sep 13, 2006, at 9:05 AM, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Majordomo2 support a nomail option as well ...
I know, since some Mailinglist I am on are migrated to Majordomo2.
Afaik does Mailman not support the "nomail" Option.
BTW, majordomo may not support 'nomail', but it does allow you to add
ad
Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello Marc,
>
> Am 2006-09-09 12:50:36, schrieb Marc G. Fournier:
>
>> And I missed this one from Joshua ... but, we aren't running Majordomo
>> from GreatCircle, we are running Majordomo2 (http://www.mj2.org) which is
>> very much being actively support ...
>
> I hav
Hello Marc,
Am 2006-09-09 12:50:36, schrieb Marc G. Fournier:
> And I missed this one from Joshua ... but, we aren't running Majordomo
> from GreatCircle, we are running Majordomo2 (http://www.mj2.org) which is
> very much being actively support ...
I have seen...
> Majordomo2 support a nomai
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Am 2006-09-07 06:15:15, schrieb Joshua D. Drake:
Honestly, it may be time we start looking at mailman.
From what I can tell Majordomo isn't even supported any longer.
Secondly we get some better management (not great but better) interfaces
with ma
Am 2006-09-07 06:15:15, schrieb Joshua D. Drake:
> >>Honestly, it may be time we start looking at mailman.
> From what I can tell Majordomo isn't even supported any longer.
> Secondly we get some better management (not great but better) interfaces
> with mailman.
>
> Mailman is a supported, la
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
As much as I dislike majordomo, I'm not seeing a strong argument here
for replacing it. As far as I can tell, there are no problems with our
using it: the "unsubscribe-in-subject" thing was added to pgsql-general
and seems to be working just fine.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As someone who does a lot of moderation using both mailman and
majordomo every single day, I can assure everyone that both
of them suck in their own way. Majordomo is nice in that I can
view a whole bunch of lists at once, and accept/reject en masse,
-Original Message-
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>; "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "General"
Sent: 07/09/06 14:27
Su
I don't see how the web stuff can be any simpler.
I view a single page, select the items I wish to keep, hit a single
button, I am done and I don't have to clutter my inbox.
This discussion is all about how people work. Most people *DO NOT* work
from email the way Alvaro and and some of the
Same goes as a user of mailman lists.
What I want is to log in to "lists.postgresql.org", and get an interface
that wil show me everything about the lists i'm subscribed to
(capability to change my flags etc) and everything about the ones I'm
admin for (which I'm not for any on pgsql.org, but i
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>
> >>Mailman is a supported, large, active, FOSS community project that is
> >>battle tested in the current field much more so then Majordomo. Holding
> >>on with a dying breaths to old software is silly.
> >
> >Can Mailman do moderation over email? If it can do that,
> > Seriously, I think that's the first time anybody said anything
> good
> > about the mailman interfaces Just the stuff I have to do for
> the
> > pgFoundry lists (of which I have only *two*) is just so much
> pain.
> > (who came up with such a brilliant thing as
> > different-password-for-ev
Seriously, I think that's the first time anybody said anything good
about the mailman interfaces Just the stuff I have to do for the
pgFoundry lists (of which I have only *two*) is just so much pain. (who
came up with such a brilliant thing as
different-password-for-everything-you-do? It's ju
Mailman is a supported, large, active, FOSS community project that is
battle tested in the current field much more so then Majordomo. Holding
on with a dying breaths to old software is silly.
Can Mailman do moderation over email? If it can do that, then I'm all
for it. If it can't, which wa
> >>> ever noticed/commented about it ... ya, you are the only one
> >>> complaining about it :)
> >> Honestly, it may be time we start looking at mailman.
> >
> > Please don't, unless Majordomo is really broken and unfixed (i.e.
> > there isn't a newer version with the bug fixed). What version
>
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >>>On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >>>
> In any case I don't see any reason to let the broken software continue
> to be broken. Surely there must be an updated version which
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
In any case I don't see any reason to let the broken software continue
to be broken. Surely there must be an updated version which corrects
this bug? A patch at least? I mean, I
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >
> >>In any case I don't see any reason to let the broken software continue
> >>to be broken. Surely there must be an updated version which corrects
> >>this bug? A patch at least? I mean, I can't
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
In any case I don't see any reason to let the broken software continue
to be broken. Surely there must be an updated version which corrects
this bug? A patch at least? I mean, I can't be the only one
complaining about it.
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
In any case I don't see any reason to let the broken software continue
to be broken. Surely there must be an updated version which corrects
this bug? A patch at least? I mean, I can't be the only one
complaining about it.
Based on this thread, an
Even though multi-line Subject: is theoretically legal according to the
RFCs, it's certainly an awful idea; how many MUAs do you know that
provide more than one line to display the subject in a normal view?
So I don't really care if Majordomo truncates the subject --- I wouldn't
see the rest of i
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Even though multi-line Subject: is theoretically legal according to the
> >> RFCs, it's certainly an awful idea; how many MUAs do you know that
> >> provide more than one line to display the subject in a normal vi
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Even though multi-line Subject: is theoretically legal according to the
>> RFCs, it's certainly an awful idea; how many MUAs do you know that
>> provide more than one line to display the subject in a normal view?
>> So I don't really c
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I noticed that Majordomo drops the second and subsequent lines of a
> > Subject: line in message before dispatching for some reason. It has
> > done this for some time; I noticed it some time ago in pgsql-es-ayuda
> > but I thought i
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I noticed that Majordomo drops the second and subsequent lines of a
> Subject: line in message before dispatching for some reason. It has
> done this for some time; I noticed it some time ago in pgsql-es-ayuda
> but I thought it may be a bug in my MUA.
Guido Neitzer wrote:
So they don't contain line feeds or carriage returns and so the can't
be multi-line. If a mail client sends multi line subjects it does
something against the RFC and I assume with that, it does something wrong.
This is the theory in RFC 2822 as far as I understand it.
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I noticed that Majordomo drops the second and subsequent lines of a
Subject: line in message before dispatching for some reason. It has
done this for some time; I noticed it some time ago in pgsql-es-ayuda
but I thought it may be
On 23.08.2006, at 16:51 Uhr, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Guido Neitzer wrote:
8<8<8<8<8<8<
2.2.1. Unstructured Header Field Bodies
Some field bodies in this standard are defined simply as
"unstructured" (which is specified below as any US-ASCII
Guido Neitzer wrote:
> 8<8<8<8<8<8<
> 2.2.1. Unstructured Header Field Bodies
>
>
>Some field bodies in this standard are defined simply as
>"unstructured" (which is specified below as any US-ASCII characters,
>except for CR and LF) wit
It most likely conforms strictly to href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc822#page-21";>Rfc 822 which is
the standard, and mostly canonical, and allows for CR and LF but not the
two together (CRLF), if I'm reading it correctly:
text= atoms, specials,
CR & bare LF, bu
On 23.08.2006, at 16:31 Uhr, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Can you have multi-line subject lines? I didn't think that was
possible.
Yes. This is the header of a mail you sent to -patches:
Aha? Subject is an "unstructured header field" and according to RFC
2822 [1]:
8<8<8<--
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I noticed that Majordomo drops the second and subsequent lines of a
> > Subject: line in message before dispatching for some reason. It has
> > done this for some time; I noticed it some time ago in pgsql-es-ayuda
> > but I thought it may be a bug i
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I noticed that Majordomo drops the second and subsequent lines of a
> Subject: line in message before dispatching for some reason. It has
> done this for some time; I noticed it some time ago in pgsql-es-ayuda
> but I thought it may be a bug in my MUA. But I just saw it ha
I noticed that Majordomo drops the second and subsequent lines of a
Subject: line in message before dispatching for some reason. It has
done this for some time; I noticed it some time ago in pgsql-es-ayuda
but I thought it may be a bug in my MUA. But I just saw it happened to
a mail from Bruce as
35 matches
Mail list logo
