ective below is not a reason to try
and harrass by continuing a pointless conversation.
Stop. Enough is enough.
andy
> At 10:25 AM +0100 2005-06-15, Andy Heath wrote:
>
>> Its customary when you interact with a community to learn
>> their language not expect them to learn yo
John Dennis wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 08:05 +0100, Andy Heath wrote:
>
>>A plea to Redhat - if you are going to purloin
>>mailman and do it with FHS then a file that
>>accompanies the mailman distribution that explains
>>how to do a manual build that conforms
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>>>>>>"Andy" == Andy Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Andy> A plea to Redhat - if you are going to purloin mailman and
> Andy> do it with FHS then a file that accompanies the mailman
> Andy>
In 2.0.6 though there was a place to plug in
archivers in mm_config.py it didn't work and
I had to hack the code which left me in a
development island unable to follow upgrades.
What's the position in 2.1.5 ?
I see the posts from another person on this and
that there is a place to pipe posts to a
I acknowledge Redhat do a good job with FHS and
do interface with the community.
>> Is there guidance in the standard mailman distributions
>> on how to build for FC starting with a tar.gz ?
>
>
> According to their particular filesystem structure? No. That is
> something that RedHat wo
Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Andy Heath wrote:
>
>>If the mailman developer community adopts the FHS for
>>mailman then that's a different story entirely and
>>I would follow without complaint.
>
>
> In fairness to John Dennis, he did raise these issues for
>>OFF-TOPIC below:
>>
>>Standards compliance (fedora) is one thing (I work in standards)
>>but when everyone already has a fine standard (put it in the
>>mailman user directory) and the community has no plans
>>to change that then i find it very silly to just throw
>>that away
>
>
> The director
Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Andy Heath wrote:
>
>>so how does "subject:.*[SPAM}.*" (admitredly meaning s or p etc) trigger
>>the behaviour but "subject.*spam" not trigger it ?
>
>
> Because on the second and subsequent passes through it is looking at
Mark,
>> Since this subject matches .*[spam].*, the message to the owner is
>> identified as spam and the whole thing goes again.
> Not sure I understand you. It doesn't get as far as the usual
> sendmail queues. How does the subject get parsed twice ?
>
> The solution is to not use regexps
Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Andy Heath wrote:
>
>>they don't show as fails at all. What appears to happen is
>>mailman keeps trying to send the mail and succeeding
>>but it keeps doing it again and again. Meanwhile no
>>mail leaves, it just sits in the spool dir
>>subject:.*[SPAM].*
>
>
> The upper/lower case is immaterial as thes matches ale all
> 'ignorecase', but you don't want the above regexp in any case since
> [SPAM] is a character set so the regexp matches anything with an 's',
> 'p', 'a' or 'm' in the subject.
>
> I don't know what would cause
Using 2.1.5 on fedora cors 3. Run an old
mailman for years but just setting this
one up afresh.
Two probs - some regexes and preventing
spams going to moderators while holding
them back:
1. regex matching with some regex'es
causes mailman to loop trying to send
mail to the list-owner and failing
12 matches
Mail list logo
