Hello,
I have one user who can't subscribe. He did the first step, and the subscribe
log lists him as "pending." He has not received the conformation email.
His webserver is on a dynamic DNS system. He can receive mail to his host from
"everyone" except Mailman lists. (Verified with a SF lis
Ahmad,
Mailman is a mailinglist management program. It is not a mass mailer.
It is designed to allow a large number of users to mail each other,
not for a single person to mail a lot of people. For instantce, a
bunch of people taking the same programming class might have a list,
or a bunch of
> Is it possible that a knowledgeable System Admin, who is running
> postfix/Mailman, would take pity on a new user and share an
> example of what the permissions should look like for the various
> directories?
I don't run postfix, but a quick google turned up the manpage which
indicates that y
> Hi,
Hi, Shannon.
> My name is Shannon McCormick and I am a member of the technology
> team @ 4charity http://www.4charity.com. We are an Application
> Service Provider (ASP) for the Non-Profit industry. We are
> currently developing a Email List Management product that we will
> make availab
Let me start this by saying that I am not a developer, I don't know
any of the developers, and I have no personal interest in this whole
thing.
I am sure that there are people on this list who's methods of personal
interaction are distasteful to some others on the list. I think that
this has bee
It might be better just to have your MTA strip attachmnets on incoming
messages to the list, before Mailman ever sees them.
This will probably be easier to manage. For instance, your message
would have been blocked if this list was set up to block messages with
attachments, but if the MTA at
I would like to point out while GAP is "source available" and
therefore might be reasonably called "open source" it is NOT "Open
Source" (as defined at http://www.opensource.org/osd.html) and is most
certainly not Free Software.
I write this not out of some sort of license zealotry, but this
As I said earlier, I (for no good reason) thought this option "turned on" the "without
implicit approval" field below.
Maybe it is time for glasses (or just a nap.)
Someone replied that this option sends non-member messages to the list admin. Is
there a way to just blackhole them?
-Peter
>
> According to Peter Hutnick:
>> This ties in nicely with a question that I asked earlier.
>>
>> Is there a way to configure Mailman so that subscribers do not
>> need approval, but non-subscribers do?
>
> Isn't that the option "R
This ties in nicely with a question that I asked earlier.
Is there a way to configure Mailman so that subscribers do not need
approval, but non-subscribers do?
> Do you think we can fix this, or everyone is going
> to be unsubscribing to avoid the spam ...
>
>>
>> TO BE REMOVED FR
I would like to configure a list so that members post directly, but
non-members require approval.
I really don't want to have to constantly keep a list of all of the
member is the "don't need approval" list.
I'm sorry if I am just missing the option for this or if it is
answered elseware.
-Pete
Maybe the rub is that it should be "su - mailman" instead of "su
mailman" I think using the - (make it a login shell) option will get
your environment right for setting up the crontab.
-Peter
>
> Matt Jenkins wrote:
>>
>> @#$@#! The INSTALL file says to do a su to mailman. Looking in
>> the
12 matches
Mail list logo
