FAQ
Hi all.

I'm using Mailman 2.1.5.

I have enabled the NNTP Gateway but there are some problems.

1) The messages from the newsgroup are not sent on the mailing list.
I don't know why, there is nothing in the error log
2) When sending a message to the newsgroup, Mailman does not obscure the
email address
(there is an obscure_addresses, but it only works for the web
archiver)

I would like to know if 2) has been implemented in recent Mailman releases.

One last thing.
What happens when Mailman have to send an email message with a broken
Subject header (R: instead of Re) to the newsgroup?



Thanks Manlio Perillo

Search Discussions

  • Brad Knowles at Aug 6, 2007 at 10:46 pm

    On 8/6/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    I'm using Mailman 2.1.5.
    BTW, the most recent version of Mailman is 2.1.9, which has a number
    of new features and some fixes for certain security holes. I'd
    strongly encourage you to upgrade.
    I have enabled the NNTP Gateway but there are some problems.

    1) The messages from the newsgroup are not sent on the mailing list.
    I don't know why, there is nothing in the error log
    Go to the web admin page for your list, then go to the sub-page for
    "Mail<->News gateways". Is the news server hostname filled in? Is
    the newsgroup name filled in? Is the moderation policy set
    correctly? Do you have the radio buttons set correctly for passing
    traffic both ways?

    In your mm_cfg.py file, do you have the correct definitions for the
    username and password you need to use when logging into the news
    server to retrieve and post articles?
    2) When sending a message to the newsgroup, Mailman does not obscure the
    email address
    (there is an obscure_addresses, but it only works for the web
    archiver)
    Correct. Mailman does not attempt to obscure addresses when posting
    mail messages to a newsgroup.
    I would like to know if 2) has been implemented in recent Mailman releases.
    Not so far as I know, but it shouldn't be hard to add. However, one
    problem you'll have is that many news servers will reject your
    articles, if you use an address obfuscation scheme that they don't
    support.

    So, your choices are to not do any obfuscation at all for news
    articles (which is what Mailman does today), or see if there is some
    common format of obfuscation that virtually all news servers are
    known to support.

    Of course, if they support it then the spammers probably already know
    about it as well, and anything you can do they are likely to be able
    to un-do.
    One last thing.
    What happens when Mailman have to send an email message with a broken
    Subject header (R: instead of Re) to the newsgroup?
    I think what happens is that the subject header will get treated as a
    normal subject, and may have additional things tacked onto the front
    of the subject line, whereas normally Mailman would have recognized
    the "Re:" portion and potentially tacked those things on between the
    "Re:" string(s) and the rest of the subject.

    But one of the core Mailman developers would be more likely to know
    the answer to that question, and they're also on this list.
    Hopefully they'll be able to respond to you within a few days.

    --
    Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
    Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 7, 2007 at 5:05 am

    Brad Knowles ha scritto:
    On 8/6/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    I'm using Mailman 2.1.5.
    BTW, the most recent version of Mailman is 2.1.9, which has a number of
    new features and some fixes for certain security holes. I'd strongly
    encourage you to upgrade.
    Mailman runs on a Debian Sarge server, so this can be a problem without
    an upgrade to Etch (but security problems are not a problem, with Debian).
    I have enabled the NNTP Gateway but there are some problems.

    1) The messages from the newsgroup are not sent on the mailing list.
    I don't know why, there is nothing in the error log
    Go to the web admin page for your list, then go to the sub-page for
    "Mail<->News gateways".
    Is the news server hostname filled in? Yes
    Is the newsgroup name filled in? Yes
    Is the moderation policy set correctly?
    The mailing list is not moderated (but requires subscription), the
    newsgroup is not moderated, so I have set the value "None"

    Do you have the radio buttons set correctly for passing traffic both ways? Yes
    In your mm_cfg.py file, do you have the correct definitions for the
    username and password you need to use when logging into the news server
    to retrieve and post articles?
    The NNTP server requires no password
    2) When sending a message to the newsgroup, Mailman does not obscure the
    email address
    (there is an obscure_addresses, but it only works for the web
    archiver)
    Correct. Mailman does not attempt to obscure addresses when posting
    mail messages to a newsgroup.
    Ok.
    I would like to know if 2) has been implemented in recent Mailman
    releases.
    Not so far as I know, but it shouldn't be hard to add. However, one
    problem you'll have is that many news servers will reject your articles,
    if you use an address obfuscation scheme that they don't support.
    Not sure.
    As an example I always use an obsured email address on usenet, without
    problems.
    But, indeed, I see that on comp.lang.python many people use their real
    email address.
    So, your choices are to not do any obfuscation at all for news articles
    (which is what Mailman does today), or see if there is some common
    format of obfuscation that virtually all news servers are known to support.

    Of course, if they support it then the spammers probably already know
    about it as well, and anything you can do they are likely to be able to
    un-do.
    Yes, this is true, unfortunately.
    One last thing.
    What happens when Mailman have to send an email message with a broken
    Subject header (R: instead of Re) to the newsgroup?
    I think what happens is that the subject header will get treated as a
    normal subject, and may have additional things tacked onto the front of
    the subject line, whereas normally Mailman would have recognized the
    "Re:" portion and potentially tacked those things on between the "Re:"
    string(s) and the rest of the subject.
    It would be nice if mailman can apply a filter to the subject, and to
    fix it.

    But one of the core Mailman developers would be more likely to know the
    answer to that question, and they're also on this list. Hopefully
    they'll be able to respond to you within a few days.

    Thanks and regards Manlio Perillo
  • Brad Knowles at Aug 7, 2007 at 5:35 am

    On 8/7/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    Mailman runs on a Debian Sarge server, so this can be a problem without
    an upgrade to Etch (but security problems are not a problem, with Debian).
    You could always install Mailman from source on that system, or you
    may be able to find a pre-built package that is based on the latest
    source.

    This is one of the typical problems when using programs from
    pre-built packages, because you're totally dependant on the
    person/group/entity that creates the packages.


    And I'm not at all convinced that "security problems are not a
    problem, with Debian" or any other OS, for that matter. Especially
    not with an old binary package that is based on old code that is
    known to have security flaws.

    I help run the Mailman server and the mail servers for python.org,
    and we use Debian Linux for the OS. But we don't use any binary
    pre-packaged software, at least not for the critical bits like
    Mailman.
    Not so far as I know, but it shouldn't be hard to add. However, one
    problem you'll have is that many news servers will reject your articles,
    if you use an address obfuscation scheme that they don't support.
    Not sure.
    As an example I always use an obsured email address on usenet, without
    problems.
    But, indeed, I see that on comp.lang.python many people use their real
    email address.
    In part, that's because we provide the news gateway function for this
    newsgroup via the mail servers at python.org -- using the same
    Mailman server and the same mail servers that are used to host this
    mailing list. Mailman is a Python project, after all. ;)

    And certainly, addresses that come in from USENET in an obscured
    fashion will most likely have their messages thrown away by most
    modern mail servers, even if the Mailman server accepts them and
    processes them as normal.


    So, when you run that gateway, you pretty much always want to use
    real addresses and not make any attempt to obfuscate addresses
    crossing one way or the other.
    I think what happens is that the subject header will get treated as a
    normal subject, and may have additional things tacked onto the front of
    the subject line, whereas normally Mailman would have recognized the
    "Re:" portion and potentially tacked those things on between the "Re:"
    string(s) and the rest of the subject.
    It would be nice if mailman can apply a filter to the subject, and to
    fix it.
    There's a limit to what Mailman can do to fix the subject line, at
    least in terms of out-of-the-box code.

    If you're a Python programmer, it shouldn't be hard for you to add
    your own module to the system to handle these things, and to hook
    that into the appropriate place in the flow of messages through the
    system. In that case, we'd ask you to contribute your changes back
    to the project via the Mailman patch page on SourceForge, so that
    others may benefit from your experience.

    --
    Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
    Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 7, 2007 at 5:54 am

    Brad Knowles ha scritto:
    On 8/7/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    Mailman runs on a Debian Sarge server, so this can be a problem without
    an upgrade to Etch (but security problems are not a problem, with
    Debian).
    You could always install Mailman from source on that system, or you may
    be able to find a pre-built package that is based on the latest source.

    This is one of the typical problems when using programs from pre-built
    packages, because you're totally dependant on the person/group/entity
    that creates the packages.
    Well, having a pre-built packages systems has also some benefits.
    And I'm not at all convinced that "security problems are not a problem,
    with Debian" or any other OS, for that matter. Especially not with an
    old binary package that is based on old code that is known to have
    security flaws.
    The Debian Secutiry team still supports Debian Sarge.
    And in theory, if a security problem is found in an upstream package,
    the fix should be back ported on the Debian package.
    I help run the Mailman server and the mail servers for python.org, and
    we use Debian Linux for the OS. But we don't use any binary
    pre-packaged software, at least not for the critical bits like Mailman.
    Ok, thanks.
    I will try to install the new version.
    [...]
    And certainly, addresses that come in from USENET in an obscured fashion
    will most likely have their messages thrown away by most modern mail
    servers, even if the Mailman server accepts them and processes them as
    normal.


    So, when you run that gateway, you pretty much always want to use real
    addresses and not make any attempt to obfuscate addresses crossing one
    way or the other.
    Well, the question of email in clear was raised by an
    it.comp.lang.python newsgroup user.
    And on this newsgroup, many of us do not use their real email address.
    I think what happens is that the subject header will get treated as a
    normal subject, and may have additional things tacked onto the front of
    the subject line, whereas normally Mailman would have recognized the
    "Re:" portion and potentially tacked those things on between the "Re:"
    string(s) and the rest of the subject.
    It would be nice if mailman can apply a filter to the subject, and to
    fix it.
    There's a limit to what Mailman can do to fix the subject line, at least
    in terms of out-of-the-box code.

    If you're a Python programmer, it shouldn't be hard for you to add your
    own module to the system to handle these things, and to hook that into
    the appropriate place in the flow of messages through the system. In
    that case, we'd ask you to contribute your changes back to the project
    via the Mailman patch page on SourceForge, so that others may benefit
    from your experience.
    Ok.



    Thanks and regards Manlio Perillo
  • Brad Knowles at Aug 7, 2007 at 7:20 am

    On 8/7/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    Well, having a pre-built packages systems has also some benefits.
    True enough, and where it makes sense we do make wide use of binary
    packages for other things on the system.
    The Debian Secutiry team still supports Debian Sarge.
    And in theory, if a security problem is found in an upstream package,
    the fix should be back ported on the Debian package.
    The crux of that problem is the "... in theory ..." part.

    In practice, we know that they make a lot of modifications that they
    don't share with us (for whatever reason), and because of all of the
    internal code changes, we can't be sure that when we fix a bug in our
    code that they fix the same bug in theirs, or that they don't create
    other bugs that we don't have.

    Also, we know that they tend to be slow to update, and they tend to
    limit the stuff they back-port.


    So, for critical stuff, I strongly believe that you really do want to
    run from the source tarballs themselves.
    Well, the question of email in clear was raised by an
    it.comp.lang.python newsgroup user.
    And on this newsgroup, many of us do not use their real email address.
    If you're used to address obfuscation, then you probably don't know
    how many news servers out there that are silently throwing away your
    articles. And you probably do care more about the address
    obfuscation than getting your articles to the widest possible
    audience.

    However, as a system administrator who would be supporting a
    reasonably large group of people, the problem you've got is that what
    particular individuals think is good for them is not necessarily good
    for the group as a whole, and may not even be good for the particular
    individuals who don't know any better.

    You will need to choose where to balance the expectations and
    benefits of single individuals against those of the group, and you
    will also have to take into account the capabilities of the software.


    One thing to keep in mind is that e-mail users generally assume that
    the addresses will not be obfuscated, and so if they start seeing
    obfuscated addresses then they are likely to be confused --
    especially if they try to reply to that person directly. So, they
    may have a benefit by having their e-mail addresses obfuscated when
    the cross the gateway, but they don't generally have an expectation
    that the gateway would do this for them. Overall, obfuscated
    addresses for e-mail users are a bad thing.

    In the case of USENET users, they may well be used to the address
    obfuscation of their choice, and they shouldn't be too surprised to
    see some users whose addresses are not obfuscated. However, you may
    not be able to re-generate a valid e-mail address for them based on
    their obfuscation scheme, so it's going to be difficult to
    un-scramble that egg. Overall, obfuscated addresses for USENET users
    may somewhat reduce their spam load, but these days spammers have
    multiple address snarfing techniques, so any obfuscation that is done
    is likely to be of minimal real benefit, although they may perceive a
    much larger benefit than is actually achieved.


    When you mix these communities via a gateway, you get some
    interesting problems where the expectations of one group conflict
    with the expectations of the other. And I'm not sure that anyone
    here can give you any hard rules to follow in such cases.

    --
    Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
    Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  • Barry Finkel at Aug 7, 2007 at 1:53 pm

    Brad Knowles wrote in reply to a posting:
    And I'm not at all convinced that "security problems are not a
    problem, with Debian" or any other OS, for that matter. Especially
    not with an old binary package that is based on old code that is
    known to have security flaws.
    When I was comparing the sources for Ubuntu/Debian Mailman 2.1.5
    against the SourceForge 2.1.9 source, I had to check the three
    security patches in 2.1.9. Two of the patches matched; one was
    completely different (different code in a different module).
    I do not have enough knowledge of the internals of Mailman to be
    able to determine if this third patch resolved the security
    problem. I ended up building my own Ubuntu package from the 2.1.9
    SourceForge source, in the process eliminating almost all of the
    Debian/Ubuntu patches. The patches were, for the most part,
    undocumented, so I had no idea exactly what they did. Nor did I know
    if they would fit into the 2.1.9 source, as some of the patches were
    based on pre-2.1.5 code.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Barry S. Finkel
    Computing and Information Systems Division
    Argonne National Laboratory Phone: +1 (630) 252-7277
    9700 South Cass Avenue Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-4601
    Building 222, Room D209 Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
    Argonne, IL 60439-4828 IBMMAIL: I1004994
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 7, 2007 at 2:20 pm

    Barry Finkel ha scritto:
    Brad Knowles wrote in reply to a posting:
    And I'm not at all convinced that "security problems are not a
    problem, with Debian" or any other OS, for that matter. Especially
    not with an old binary package that is based on old code that is
    known to have security flaws.
    When I was comparing the sources for Ubuntu/Debian Mailman 2.1.5
    against the SourceForge 2.1.9 source, I had to check the three
    security patches in 2.1.9. Two of the patches matched; one was
    completely different (different code in a different module).
    I do not have enough knowledge of the internals of Mailman to be
    able to determine if this third patch resolved the security
    problem. I ended up building my own Ubuntu package from the 2.1.9
    SourceForge source, in the process eliminating almost all of the
    Debian/Ubuntu patches. The patches were, for the most part,
    undocumented, so I had no idea exactly what they did. Nor did I know
    if they would fit into the 2.1.9 source, as some of the patches were
    based on pre-2.1.5 code.
    This was unexpected!
    Do you have opened a bug report?

    However the life of a Debian package maintainer is not easy.
    It should maintain a package to a stable version for 1-2 years.


    Regards Manlio Perillo
  • Barry Finkel at Aug 7, 2007 at 3:49 pm

    Barry Finkel ha scritto:
    Brad Knowles wrote in reply to a posting:
    And I'm not at all convinced that "security problems are not a
    problem, with Debian" or any other OS, for that matter. Especially
    not with an old binary package that is based on old code that is
    known to have security flaws.
    When I was comparing the sources for Ubuntu/Debian Mailman 2.1.5
    against the SourceForge 2.1.9 source, I had to check the three
    security patches in 2.1.9. Two of the patches matched; one was
    completely different (different code in a different module).
    I do not have enough knowledge of the internals of Mailman to be
    able to determine if this third patch resolved the security
    problem. I ended up building my own Ubuntu package from the 2.1.9
    SourceForge source, in the process eliminating almost all of the
    Debian/Ubuntu patches. The patches were, for the most part,
    undocumented, so I had no idea exactly what they did. Nor did I know
    if they would fit into the 2.1.9 source, as some of the patches were
    based on pre-2.1.5 code.
    Manlio Perillo replied:
    This was unexpected!
    Do you have opened a bug report?
    No, because

    1) I have built an Ubuntu Mailman package from the 2.1.9 SF source,
    and I am no longer interested in whatever Debian/Ubuntu did/does
    with their patches. I built a package, it works, and I know
    how to build a package from the next Mailman source release.
    I know which Debian/Ubuntu patches to include (those that put
    files in the proper Debian directories).

    2) I have no idea if there is a bug. I have to assume that the
    third security patch they put into their Mailman package does
    resolve the security problem. I really have no way to test,
    nor do I have a desire to test. What bug do you suspect from
    what I wrote?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Barry S. Finkel
    Computing and Information Systems Division
    Argonne National Laboratory Phone: +1 (630) 252-7277
    9700 South Cass Avenue Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-4601
    Building 222, Room D209 Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
    Argonne, IL 60439-4828 IBMMAIL: I1004994
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 21, 2007 at 8:09 am

    Barry Finkel ha scritto:
    [...]
    The patches were, for the most part,
    undocumented, so I had no idea exactly what they did. Nor did I know
    if they would fit into the 2.1.9 source, as some of the patches were
    based on pre-2.1.5 code.
    Manlio Perillo replied:
    This was unexpected!
    Do you have opened a bug report?
    No, because
    [...]
    2) I have no idea if there is a bug. I

    Sorry for the late response.
    I think that the lack of documentation in the code can be considered a bug.




    Regards Manlio Perillo
  • Mark Sapiro at Aug 19, 2007 at 2:03 am

    Manlio Perillo wrote:
    1) The messages from the newsgroup are not sent on the mailing list.
    I don't know why, there is nothing in the error log

    Is Mailman's cron/gate_news being run every five minutes from Mailman's
    crontab?

    If so, it might somehow be the case that the list's usenet_watermark
    attribute is greater that the last message number in the newsgroup
    (e.g., if you changed news servers).

    - --
    Mark Sapiro <msapiro at value.net> The highway is for gamblers,
    San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 20, 2007 at 7:18 am

    Mark Sapiro ha scritto:
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Manlio Perillo wrote:
    1) The messages from the newsgroup are not sent on the mailing list.
    I don't know why, there is nothing in the error log

    Is Mailman's cron/gate_news being run every five minutes from Mailman's
    crontab?
    Thanks: the cron tab entry is still commented.
    However I think that this should be documented in the admnistrative web
    interface.



    Regards Manlio Perillo
  • Mark Sapiro at Aug 20, 2007 at 2:23 pm
    Manlio Perillo
    Mark Sapiro ha scritto:
    Is Mailman's cron/gate_news being run every five minutes from Mailman's
    crontab?
    Thanks: the cron tab entry is still commented.
    However I think that this should be documented in the admnistrative web
    interface.

    The istallation of the crontab is documented in the installation manual
    (http://www.list.org/mailman-install/node41.html>.

    I don't think it is appropriate to document cron/gate_news in the web
    admin interface because the typical list admin can't do anything about
    it anyway. It is an installation responsibility, not a list admin
    responsibility.

    Also, in Mailman as we ship it, the cron/gate_news entry is not
    commented out. That was done either by your site or by some repackager.

    --
    Mark Sapiro <msapiro at value.net> The highway is for gamblers,
    San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
  • Barry Finkel at Aug 22, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    Barry Finkel ha scritto:
    [...]
    The patches were, for the most part,
    undocumented, so I had no idea exactly what they did. Nor did I know
    if they would fit into the 2.1.9 source, as some of the patches were
    based on pre-2.1.5 code.
    Manlio Perillo replied:
    This was unexpected!
    Do you have opened a bug report?
    No, because
    [...]
    2) I have no idea if there is a bug. I

    Manlio Perillo replied:
    Sorry for the late response.
    I think that the lack of documentation in the code can be considered a bug.
    Then I would have to file a bug report on almost all of the
    Debian/Ubuntu patches to Mailman. I looked at them all, and I discarded
    most. I kept a few that were related to where libraries were put.
    I was not interested in making source code modifications where
    1) I don't fully understand the source that comes from SourceForge, and
    2) there is no documentation as to what the Debian changes do.

    It would be nice to know what each change does, but since I am
    not installing most of them, it really does not matter.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Barry S. Finkel
    Computing and Information Systems Division
    Argonne National Laboratory Phone: +1 (630) 252-7277
    9700 South Cass Avenue Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-4601
    Building 222, Room D209 Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
    Argonne, IL 60439-4828 IBMMAIL: I1004994
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 25, 2007 at 5:16 pm

    Barry Finkel ha scritto:
    [...]
    Sorry for the late response.
    I think that the lack of documentation in the code can be considered a bug.
    Then I would have to file a bug report on almost all of the
    Debian/Ubuntu patches to Mailman. I looked at them all, and I discarded
    most. I kept a few that were related to where libraries were put.
    I was not interested in making source code modifications where
    1) I don't fully understand the source that comes from SourceForge, and
    2) there is no documentation as to what the Debian changes do.

    It would be nice to know what each change does, but since I am
    not installing most of them, it really does not matter.
    Do the debian maintainer of Mailman frequent this mailing list?



    Regards Manlio Perillo
  • Brad Knowles at Aug 26, 2007 at 5:39 am

    On 8/25/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    Do the debian maintainer of Mailman frequent this mailing list?
    Not so far as I know.

    Improved contact between our project and the other projects which
    take our code and create binary packages is one thing that we would
    like to work on, but of course the two biggest problems are:

    1. Finding out which projects are actually doing what with
    our code

    And:

    2. Motivating them to actually come talk to us about their
    changes


    If you know who the maintainer of the Debian packages is, and you can
    light a fire under them to get them to come participate on this list,
    we'd appreciate that.

    --
    Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
    Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  • Todd Zullinger at Aug 26, 2007 at 5:42 am
    (Disclaimer: I'm not a Debian maintainer or user)

    Brad Knowles wrote:
    On 8/25/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    Do the debian maintainer of Mailman frequent this mailing list?
    Not so far as I know.

    Improved contact between our project and the other projects which
    take our code and create binary packages is one thing that we would
    like to work on, but of course the two biggest problems are:

    1. Finding out which projects are actually doing what with
    our code
    AFAICS, The Debian patches to Mailman are here:

    http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-mailman/trunk/debian/patches/
    If you know who the maintainer of the Debian packages is, and you can
    light a fire under them to get them to come participate on this list,
    we'd appreciate that.
    For anyone interested, the maintainer contact addresses and quite a
    bit of other info is available on the package info pages:

    http://packages.debian.org/stable/mail/mailman
    http://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mailman.html

    --
    Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Nothing is so simple that it cannot be misunderstood.
    -- Teague's Paradox

    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: not available
    Type: application/pgp-signature
    Size: 542 bytes
    Desc: not available
    Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20070826/5e85d5d5/attachment.pgp
  • Brad Knowles at Aug 27, 2007 at 1:44 am

    On 8/26/07, Todd Zullinger wrote:

    AFAICS, The Debian patches to Mailman are here:

    http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-mailman/trunk/debian/patches/
    And our development page on SourceForge is at
    <http://sourceforge.net/projects/mailman>, although internally all
    the new work is being maintained through Bazar on Launchpad (see
    <http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/2007/06/22/Bye+bye+Subversion%2C+Hello+Bazaar>).
    The Debian developers are welcome to send their patches to us through
    one of these two mechanisms.
    For anyone interested, the maintainer contact addresses and quite a
    bit of other info is available on the package info pages:

    http://packages.debian.org/stable/mail/mailman
    http://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mailman.html
    And all of our contact information is at <http://www.list.org/>, and
    the related pages.


    There's no way we can possibly track down every single developer on
    every single platform that is creating localized patches for Mailman
    on their platform. The only way this process can possibly work is if
    they use our mechanisms to send their patches to us.

    There are no other scalable options.

    --
    Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
    Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  • Todd Zullinger at Aug 27, 2007 at 1:19 am

    Brad Knowles wrote:
    There's no way we can possibly track down every single developer on
    every single platform that is creating localized patches for Mailman
    on their platform. The only way this process can possibly work is
    if they use our mechanisms to send their patches to us.
    FWIW, I was not suggesting that the Mailman developer's track down the
    Debian maintainers (or any other packagers). I only provided the
    links to the Debian info in case someone on this list wanted to
    contact them and ask about the patches they have.

    I don't follow the developer list so I don't know if any of the Debian
    maintainers are on it or if they've submitted any non-debian-specific
    patches to the Mailman developers.

    If they haven't, then I think they're being quite negligent -- as,
    apparently, does the Debian policy guidelines.

    --
    Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Nothing says, "Obey me!" like a bloody head on a fence post.
    -- Stewie Griffin

    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: not available
    Type: application/pgp-signature
    Size: 542 bytes
    Desc: not available
    Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20070826/d372f106/attachment.pgp
  • Manlio Perillo at Aug 26, 2007 at 7:16 am

    Brad Knowles ha scritto:
    On 8/25/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    Do the debian maintainer of Mailman frequent this mailing list?
    Not so far as I know.

    Improved contact between our project and the other projects which take
    our code and create binary packages is one thing that we would like to
    work on, but of course the two biggest problems are:
    [...]
    That's strange.
    One of the Debian policicy is the strict contact between the package
    maintainer and the upstream software authors.

    The Debian maintainer(s) of Mailman can be easily found at:
    http://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mailman.html



    Regards Manlio Perillo
  • Brad Knowles at Aug 27, 2007 at 1:45 am

    On 8/26/07, Manlio Perillo wrote:

    That's strange.
    One of the Debian policicy is the strict contact between the package
    maintainer and the upstream software authors.
    See my previous message on this thread.
    The Debian maintainer(s) of Mailman can be easily found at:
    http://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mailman.html
    And they should already know how to contact us, and where all of our
    respective resources are. If they're going to be making
    modifications to our code, the only scalable option is for them to
    use our mechanisms to send their changes to us, and then it's up to
    us as to whether or not those are accepted and incorporated into the
    mainstream codebase.

    There simply are no other scalable options.

    --
    Brad Knowles <brad at shub-internet.org>, Consultant & Author
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
    Slides from Invited Talks: <http://tinyurl.com/tj6q4>

    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupmailman-users @
categoriespython
postedAug 6, '07 at 6:51p
activeAug 27, '07 at 1:45a
posts21
users5
websitelist.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase