FAQ
Have multiple mailing lists under one domain

Is there any way to search across all lists for a certain member and make a
global change to their email or name?

As an administrator, if a user changes their email, I often have to search
each list for the member to locate them (1) and then change their info (2)

Thank you.

--
Brian J. Luria DVM, DACVIM
Bluepearl Veterinary Partners
Florida Veterinary Specialists
Tampa: (813) 933-8944
Clearwater: (727) 572-0132
Brandon: (813) 571-3303
www.bluepearlvet.com

Search Discussions

  • Brian Luria at Dec 17, 2009 at 3:54 pm
    Apologies if this is a repeat, wasn't sure it went through
    *****
    Have multiple mailing lists under one domain

    Is there any way to search across all lists for a certain member and make a
    global change to their email or name?

    As an administrator, if a user changes their email, I often have to search
    each list for the member to locate them (1) and then change their info (2)

    Thank you.
  • Adam McGreggor at Dec 17, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 04:36:14PM -0500, Brian Luria wrote:
    Have multiple mailing lists under one domain

    Is there any way to search across all lists for a certain member
    find_member if you've got shell access
    and make a global change to their email or name?
    I tend to see how many entries there are, if it's one or two, i'll do
    it manually; clone_member is a dandy tool for where there are quite a
    few.

    Both of those just work on the email address; for the name, make the
    person handle that via /options, and instruct them to set the 'set
    globally' option.

    --
    ``novissima autem inimica destruetur mors omnia enim
    subiecit sub pedibus eius cum autem dicat''
    (I Corinthios 15:26 (Biblia Sacra Vulgata))
  • Adam McGreggor at Dec 17, 2009 at 7:00 pm

    On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:00:34PM -0500, Brian Luria wrote:
    Thanks
    please don't
    (1) reply to list-posts off-list: send them to the list;
    (2) top-post
    The site is hosted so I dont have shell access. Only the admin interface
    etc. I presume that is of no use(?)
    It doesn't look that way; although if the hosts will write a wrapper
    to make clone_members/find_members available that may be a help.

    I don't imagine you're the site-admin, either, for the lists.

    That said, you might find the thread of which
    http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users at python.org/msg41130.html
    is a part, of interest.

    I would suggest that, in the absence of these, you get the users to
    bloody-well do their housekeeping themselves. Point them to the
    options page, if necessary, pre-fill a URI with their email address,
    so something like:
    http://lists.example.org/mailman/options/listfoo/foo at example.com
    where they can change their name, and see which other lists that email
    address is a member of.

    People asking me -- as listadmin -- to change their subscriptions usually
    get something like
    "mail me the request from both the old and new address so i know
    it's not nefarious, or visit
    <http://lists.example.org/help#swapsub>
    for instructions on how to do it yourself."

    That said, I'm grumpy, and miserable, and believe people should take
    responsibility for themselves.

    --
    ``Democracy means that if the doorbell rings in the early hours,
    it is likely to be the milkman.'' (Winston Churchill, attrib.)
  • Stephen J. Turnbull at Dec 18, 2009 at 5:55 am
    Somebody-whom-I-don't-want-to-pick-on-in-particular writes:
    On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:00:34PM -0500, (Some) Poor Fellow wrote:
    Thanks
    >
    please don't
    (1) reply to list-posts off-list: send them to the list;
    (2) top-post
    Given the recent surge in non-traditional list admins (ie, folks
    without a Unix or mail admin background), I feel this is excessively
    curt. I don't know about this particular Poor Fellow, but the generic
    Poor Fellow probably had no idea it wasn't going to the right place
    (he probably isn't subscribed, either, so he won't notice that he
    didn't get his own post back).

    I suggest that better wording is "Please be careful to ensure that
    your reply is addressed to the list."

    Actually there should be a FAQ for that in Section 1, so you can add
    "see FAQ x.yy". I suggest adding this to FAQ 1.22. Something like

    1.22 How should I write my post when asking a question on this
    mailing list?

    Customs vary on the Internet, and while we [except for the
    majority of us old Usenet curmudgeons ;-] don't want to impose our
    customs on the rest of the 'Net, your questions *will* be answered
    more quickly and helpfully if you observe the following:

    o The first thing you should do is indicate that you've done your
    homework. Look at the Mailman documentation linked from
    http://www.list.org/docs.html. Search the Frequently Asked
    Questions in the wiki. Search the archives of the mailing list
    (see "How do I search the archives of the mailman-users mailing
    list?").

    Once you've looked through all the relevant pieces of
    documentation, FAQ entries, archive messages, etc... and you
    still haven't found your answer, please give us additional
    information as well as the question itself. See FAQ .

    Specifically, we would like to know:

    1. What methods did you use to look through the documentation
    and search the FAQ, mailing list archives, etc...?

    2. If there were things that initially sounded relevant but
    ended up not being useful to you, which ones were they?

    If you did miss something that is relevant, then having this
    information will help us go back and improve the
    documentation/FAQ/etc... so that the next person who does the
    same search will hopefully hit the correct answer.

    In addition, we would appreciate it if you could provide URLs
    and precise descriptions of the information you found but which
    was not helpful to you.

    o If you have a specific/detailed question, please proceed to FAQ
    entry 1.23 at "I have a specific-detailed question -- What kind
    of information do I need to provide when posting a question to
    this mailing list?"

    See also FAQ entry 4.78 "Troubleshooting- No mail going out to
    lists members."

    With this information, we are much more likely to be able to
    provide you assistance with your question.

    o Be careful to ensure that your reply is addressed to the list.
    The widespread practice of "Reply-To munging" is *not*
    implemented on our lists because it makes it difficult (and
    sometimes impossible) to send a private reply. Because this
    need is frequent in working on Mailman issues (many questions
    involve details of network and host configuration that could be
    used by crackers to compromise security), we do not set
    Reply-To to the list. (Reply-To munging is not a good idea in
    most cases; see Chip Rosenthal's essay "Reply-To Munging
    Considered Harmful".)

    o It is a very good idea to subscribe to the list, or at least
    follow the thread in the archives. For various reasons,
    related posts may *not* be addressed to you, but only to the
    list. It would be a shame if you missed them.

    o Once you've sent your post, *wait* at least 48 hours for it to
    be forwarded to you or appear in the archives before assuming
    it got lost. Because we must allow non-members to post, we are
    relatively vulnerable to spam, and the lists are *moderated* by
    rather busy volunteers.

    Also, make sure that any spamblocking software you have is
    *off* for a while; you will get no sympathy at all if you block
    a reply (and note you don't know where it will come from,
    because the respondent may feel that the required information
    is sensitive, and should not be discussed in public -- see #2
    above). No sympathy for the delay itself, and many of the less
    frequent contributors will ignore you completely thereafter.
    (The core people will still take care of you, but about half
    the useful answers come from the peanut gallery -- it's a
    significant resource.)

    o Avoid top-posting (adding a quick comment to the top of a
    message, leaving the automatically included quoted block
    intact. The people who provide the best answers are used to a
    style in which irrelevant details in the quote are *trimmed*
    (deleted), and in which responses to specific points appear
    *inline*, ie, immediately below the statements or questions
    they refer to. We don't ask you to like this style; however,
    it is a fact that most of us will be irritated if we scan to
    the bottom of a long quote and discover we just wasted as
    little as 5 seconds doing so.

    In general, conforming to the practices of "Netiquette" will
    smooth the path to resolving your Mailman issues. It's not
    just a matter of conforming to the "peculiar institutions" of
    the Mailman community: these practices are actually more
    effective in this context. [needs URL for netiquette]

    Sorry, I'm Confluence-differently-abled at the moment. Assuming
    nobody thinks this is a terrible idea, I'll eventually get to posting
    this myself, but if somebody wants to speed up the process, I wouldn't
    object. :-)

    In case it's not obvious, stuff in [square brackets] should not be
    cut/pasted to the FAQ.
  • Lindsay Haisley at Dec 18, 2009 at 6:29 am

    On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 14:55 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
    Somebody-whom-I-don't-want-to-pick-on-in-particular writes:
    On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:00:34PM -0500, (Some) Poor Fellow
    wrote:
    Thanks
    please don't
    (1) reply to list-posts off-list: send them to the list;
    (2) top-post
    Given the recent surge in non-traditional list admins (ie, folks
    without a Unix or mail admin background), I feel this is excessively
    curt.
    Stephen, with all due respect for the work you put into your post, I
    think it goes a bit overboard in the other direction. If I can pose a
    question in 6 or 7 lines of text, do I really need to read a couple of
    hundred lines of instruction? - or dig through a FAQ and write a
    critique of it - just to get a simple answer?

    I recently posted a question to this list in about 7 lines inquiring as
    to what file is the source document in a Mailman Pipermail archive. I
    asked on the list precisely _because_ I didn't want to spend the time
    searching through FAQs and other documentation for a simple answer to a
    simple question. Mark kindly answered my question within a few minutes
    with two lines - one with the name of the file in question and the
    second with the URL of a wiki entry discussing the matter in some detail
    (thank you, Mark!).

    I think your post has some good ideas, but needs a generous application
    of the KISS principle :-)

    --
    Lindsay Haisley | "Never expect the people who caused a problem
    FMP Computer Services | to solve it." - Albert Einstein
    512-259-1190 |
    http://www.fmp.com |
  • Stephen J. Turnbull at Dec 18, 2009 at 1:09 pm
    Lindsay Haisley writes:
    Stephen, with all due respect for the work you put into your post, I
    think it goes a bit overboard in the other direction. If I can pose a
    question in 6 or 7 lines of text, do I really need to read a couple of
    hundred lines of instruction?
    It's under 100 lines, of which almost half were cut-and-pasted from
    the existing FAQ 1.22.
    - or dig through a FAQ and write a critique of it - just to get a
    simple answer?
    Yup, that's exactly the stuff I cut and pasted.

    Anyway, you're entirely missing the point. I don't expect anybody to
    read FAQ 1.22 in advance of comitting a faux pas; this particular FAQ
    is mostly for pointing to *afterward*.
    I recently posted a question to this list in about 7 lines
    inquiring as to what file is the source document in a Mailman
    Pipermail archive. I asked on the list precisely _because_ I
    didn't want to spend the time searching through FAQs and other
    documentation for a simple answer to a simple question.
    Er, that's precisely what FAQs and documentation in general are for,
    so I suggest you go read the current version of FAQ 1.22, then. It
    was written for people like you.<wink>

    More seriously, you've been around long enough (and have presumably
    actually perused the FAQ once or twice) to have a sense of what's
    *not* in there. You're obviously not the audience for FAQ 1.22, and
    the question you describe is not one of the ones that Mark should make
    a New Year's resolution to stop answering.
  • Geoff Shang at Dec 18, 2009 at 1:31 pm
    Hi,

    Excuse the top-posting. :)

    When I first had to look at the FAQs and subscribe to this list to get some
    problems sorted, there were two FAQs. There may will still be. It appeared
    to me that the much shorter one was by far the more visible, and I only
    found the main WIKI-based FAQ when I went to look in the WIKI, which seemed
    to me an obvious thing to do but might not to people less familiar with open
    source projects and their methodologies.

    I think that two things would cut down on the "see the FAQ" type questions:

    1. Get rid of the non-WIKI FAQ, merging any content that's not already in
    the WIKI, then point everyone there. The WIKI FAQ is an excellent resource,
    and I'm sure many people would find the answers to their questions if they
    knew to look there.

    2. In the places where this list is mentioned, make it clear that this
    list, which is given as the main support address for Mailman, is a mailing
    list, that it's a moderated list so posts may take a day or two to be sent,
    and that we cannot reset your password for you or other types of things that
    specific hosting providers need to do. A comment about the various forks of
    Mailman which can't really be supported might also be a good idea.

    Just my 2c as a person who's come on board here in the past couple of
    months.

    Geoff.







    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org>
    To: <fmouse at fmp.com>
    Cc: <mailman-users at python.org>
    Sent: Friday, 18 December, 2009 3:09 PM
    Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Meta: bringing along the newcomers


    Lindsay Haisley writes:
    Stephen, with all due respect for the work you put into your post, I
    think it goes a bit overboard in the other direction. If I can pose a
    question in 6 or 7 lines of text, do I really need to read a couple of
    hundred lines of instruction?
    It's under 100 lines, of which almost half were cut-and-pasted from
    the existing FAQ 1.22.
    - or dig through a FAQ and write a critique of it - just to get a
    simple answer?
    Yup, that's exactly the stuff I cut and pasted.

    Anyway, you're entirely missing the point. I don't expect anybody to
    read FAQ 1.22 in advance of comitting a faux pas; this particular FAQ
    is mostly for pointing to *afterward*.
    I recently posted a question to this list in about 7 lines
    inquiring as to what file is the source document in a Mailman
    Pipermail archive. I asked on the list precisely _because_ I
    didn't want to spend the time searching through FAQs and other
    documentation for a simple answer to a simple question.
    Er, that's precisely what FAQs and documentation in general are for,
    so I suggest you go read the current version of FAQ 1.22, then. It
    was written for people like you.<wink>

    More seriously, you've been around long enough (and have presumably
    actually perused the FAQ once or twice) to have a sense of what's
    *not* in there. You're obviously not the audience for FAQ 1.22, and
    the question you describe is not one of the ones that Mark should make
    a New Year's resolution to stop answering.
    ------------------------------------------------------
    Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
    http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
    Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
    Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
    Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
    Unsubscribe:
    http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/geoff%40quitelikely.com


    __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
    database 4698 (20091218) __________

    The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

    http://www.eset.com




    __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4698 (20091218) __________

    The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

    http://www.eset.com
  • Brad Knowles at Dec 23, 2009 at 5:48 am

    On Dec 18, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

    It's under 100 lines, of which almost half were cut-and-pasted from
    the existing FAQ 1.22.
    Most of which I wrote, and which I probably was not in a particularly good mood when I wrote it. It definitely needs re-working.
    Anyway, you're entirely missing the point. I don't expect anybody to
    read FAQ 1.22 in advance of comitting a faux pas; this particular FAQ
    is mostly for pointing to *afterward*.
    Indeed. That is precisely the point.

    --
    Brad Knowles <bradknowles at shub-internet.org>
    LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
  • Geoff Shang at Dec 18, 2009 at 4:09 pm
    Hi,

    Sorry again for the top-post, not using my regular Email client. This is a
    temporary condition.

    First, your members can do this for themselves, and I for one encourage them
    to do this. They can simply change these in their options page for one of
    the lists and then choose to change it globally.

    Unfortunately, there appears to be some restriction that prevents a list
    admin from doing this. I vaguely recall that there is a work-around for
    this, but can't recall it right now. I'm sure someone will mention it if
    there is.

    Geoff.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Brian Luria" <bluria at gmail.com>
    To: <mailman-users at python.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, 16 December, 2009 11:36 PM
    Subject: [Mailman-Users] Searching across lists and making global changes


    Have multiple mailing lists under one domain

    Is there any way to search across all lists for a certain member and make a
    global change to their email or name?

    As an administrator, if a user changes their email, I often have to search
    each list for the member to locate them (1) and then change their info (2)

    Thank you.

    --
    Brian J. Luria DVM, DACVIM
    Bluepearl Veterinary Partners
    Florida Veterinary Specialists
    Tampa: (813) 933-8944
    Clearwater: (727) 572-0132
    Brandon: (813) 571-3303
    www.bluepearlvet.com
    ------------------------------------------------------
    Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
    http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
    Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
    Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
    Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
    Unsubscribe:
    http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/geoff%40quitelikely.com


    __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
    database 4697 (20091217) __________

    The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

    http://www.eset.com




    __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4699 (20091218) __________

    The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

    http://www.eset.com

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupmailman-users @
categoriespython
postedDec 16, '09 at 9:36p
activeDec 23, '09 at 5:48a
posts10
users6
websitelist.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase