[luv-main] list-id issue -- we have a change in list naming?
Hi, I had anew message from the list (James Harper), but it didn't get to the right folders via my rules in my .forward -- this seems to be due to the List-Id head being different, possibly running over two lines? List-Id: "Main LUV community and support mailing list." <luv-main.lists.luv.asn.au> This from my .forward $h_List-Id: matches "luv-main.luv.asn.au" Hmm, okay it might not be multi-line issue, but still a change? luv-main.luv.asn.au luv-main.lists.luv.asn.au Are other lists changing this way? Was this an error? -- Kind Regards AndrewM Andrew McGlashan
Andrew McGlashan wrote:
I had anew message from the list (James Harper), but it didn't get to the right folders via my rules in my .forward -- this seems to be due to the List-Id head being different, possibly running over two lines?
Ditto from Peter Ross as well. I've added to my .forward for this one, hope I don't need to change all other luv lists entries.... -- Kind Regards AndrewM Andrew McGlashan
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 02:28:12PM +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
I had anew message from the list (James Harper), but it didn't get to the right folders via my rules in my .forward -- this seems to be due to the List-Id head being different, possibly running over two lines?
List-Id: "Main LUV community and support mailing list." <luv-main.lists.luv.asn.au>
it looks to me as if LUV are converting from Sympa to Mailman, which is running on the lists.luv.asn.au domain. i have no inside knowledge if this is what is actually happening, but that's my guess. when i checked earlier, the old archives hadn't been imported into pipermail. i hope that gets fixed. IMO, having done this kind of mailing list conversion several times before, it should have been done *before* the cutover to the new list manager and archive...unless they're doing it as a response to a hardware failure or similar emergency. would have been nice to get an announcement about it too. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> BOFH excuse #229: wrong polarity of neutron flow
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 09:25:54PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
when i checked earlier, the old archives hadn't been imported into pipermail. i hope that gets fixed.
i also hope they get rid of the new and annoying [luv-main] tag in the subject line. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au> BOFH excuse #393: Interference from the Van Allen Belt.
Hello, Craig Sanders:
IMO, having done this kind of mailing list conversion several times before, it should have been done before the cutover to the new list manager and archive...unless they're doing it as a response to a hardware failure or similar emergency.
Indeed this is being done as a response to a hardware failure of some sort.
would have been nice to get an announcement about it too.
At the moment we're waiting for our sysadmin to take physical possession of the failed server (in any case due to be decommissioned), which should happen tomorrow. Once we've clarified the situation we'll make an announcement... Jiri -- Jiri Baum <jiri@baum.com.au> http://www.baum.com.au/sabik
On 14.09.11 22:54, Jiri Baum wrote:
At the moment we're waiting for our sysadmin to take physical possession of the failed server (in any case due to be decommissioned), which should happen tomorrow. Once we've clarified the situation we'll make an announcement...
Doesn't matter now. We've probably all modified our mail filtering to accommodate either domain. As craig suggested, it'd be very nifty, though, if we could lose the "[luv-main]" pollution in the Subject header. The plethora of list headers on which to filter, make it entirely redundant. Erik -- When I die, I want to die peacefully, in my sleep. Like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011, Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> wrote:
As craig suggested, it'd be very nifty, though, if we could lose the "[luv-main]" pollution in the Subject header. The plethora of list headers on which to filter, make it entirely redundant.
Also mangling the subject breaks DKIM in almost all cases as the Subject is signed in all typical configurations. Appending a footer doesn't necessarily break things as the signer can use the l= flag. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Quoting Erik Christiansen (dvalin@internode.on.net):
As craig suggested, it'd be very nifty, though, if we could lose the "[luv-main]" pollution in the Subject header. The plethora of list headers on which to filter, make it entirely redundant.
I expect the listadmins will get around to that, when they catch up on sleep and have some breathing room. It's a Mailman default, but easily changeable (General options, Prefix for subject line of list postings).
Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> wrote:
As craig suggested, it'd be very nifty, though, if we could lose the "[luv-main]" pollution in the Subject header. The plethora of list headers on which to filter, make it entirely redundant.
It also breaks DKIM signatures. As I remember, mailman can be configured not to modify headers in ways that modify signed material, and there are further improvements under development, for example to allow the list server to re-sign the headers in the event that changes are made.
Quoting Craig Sanders (cas@taz.net.au):
when i checked earlier, the old archives hadn't been imported into pipermail. i hope that gets fixed.
Incidentally, I have experience doing that, and would be glad to help if help is needed. You basically just cat together any mboxes that need to be combined, put that mbox into the appropriate place ($MAILMAN_HOME/archives/private/luv-main.mbox), and then proceed as I've described in http://lists.svlug.org/archives/volunteers/2011q3/002356.html
participants (7)
-
Andrew McGlashan -
Craig Sanders -
Erik Christiansen -
Jason White -
Jiri Baum -
Rick Moen -
Russell Coker