On 13/01/2016 8:42 PM, Erik Christiansen via luv-main wrote:
On 13.01.16 20:09, Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
On 13/01/2016 10:31 AM, Brian May wrote:
Tony Langdon via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
On closer observation, it started with the message from you that I replied to, and it's only you. Another coincidence is that the Subject: header hasn't been munged in this thread, yet everyone else's posts still have the Subject: munging.
I don't see any subject munging for any posts on luv-main.
I got it wrong, was actually referring to From: address munging.
Nah, I wouldn't hold my breath. Hints on that one have been going to /dev/null since last year. It seems we're all supposed to undo the crap individually at our ends.
I'm just mystified as to why the thread that Russell's message started is not being From: munged, whereas all else is. Though your message is munged, and Reply List is working perfectly. It wasn't so much the From: munging that was bothering me, but the inconsistent reply behaviour (I dislike Reply All, because of the extra emails it generates, much prefer Reply List). -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
Tony Langdon via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
I'm just mystified as to why the thread that Russell's message started is not being From: munged, whereas all else is. Though your message is munged, and Reply List is working perfectly.
Are you sure you are not getting confused with emails (like this) that are being CCed to you? You might be looking at the email that was sent directly to you without going via the mailing list. -- Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz> https://linuxpenguins.xyz/brian/
On 14/01/2016 9:34 AM, Brian May wrote:
Tony Langdon via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
I'm just mystified as to why the thread that Russell's message started is not being From: munged, whereas all else is. Though your message is munged, and Reply List is working perfectly.
Are you sure you are not getting confused with emails (like this) that are being CCed to you?
You might be looking at the email that was sent directly to you without going via the mailing list.
They're still being filtered into my LUV-Main folder. I'm going to have to check my filter settings for the list. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:20:06 PM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
It wasn't so much the From: munging that was bothering me, but the inconsistent reply behaviour (I dislike Reply All, because of the extra emails it generates, much prefer Reply List).
Tony, the dmarc_moderation_action action that Joel requests gives different behavior for everyone using DKIM (even those not using DMARC) to those who don't. If that was used as Joel requested then mail from me, Lev, everyone who uses Gmail, and others would go as it does now and mail from everyone else would have the From: line preserved. I agree that consistent behavior is a good thing. On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:56:06 AM Joel W. Shea via luv-main wrote:
Could you please disable from_as_list? As dmarc_moderation_action would suffice.
On 14/01/2016 12:26 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:20:06 PM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
It wasn't so much the From: munging that was bothering me, but the inconsistent reply behaviour (I dislike Reply All, because of the extra emails it generates, much prefer Reply List).
Tony, the dmarc_moderation_action action that Joel requests gives different behavior for everyone using DKIM (even those not using DMARC) to those who don't. If that was used as Joel requested then mail from me, Lev, everyone who uses Gmail, and others would go as it does now and mail from everyone else would have the From: line preserved.
I agree that consistent behavior is a good thing.
I am not bothered by the changing From: line, but the messages with the From: line preserved here, also don't allow me to use Reply List, which is the annoying part. The only saving grace is the button is in the same place, but then having to clean up the To: addresses (and I've just deleted the wrong one, so gotta screw around more. :/ ) -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 02:46:03 AM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
I am not bothered by the changing From: line, but the messages with the From: line preserved here, also don't allow me to use Reply List, which is the annoying part. The only saving grace is the button is in the same place, but then having to clean up the To: addresses (and I've just deleted the wrong one, so gotta screw around more. :/ )
I'm CCing you so you will receive 2 copies of this message. The one that has "via luv-main" will support reply to list and the one that goes directly won't. Best to not "clean up" the addresses.
On 14/01/2016 9:45 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 02:46:03 AM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
I am not bothered by the changing From: line, but the messages with the From: line preserved here, also don't allow me to use Reply List, which is the annoying part. The only saving grace is the button is in the same place, but then having to clean up the To: addresses (and I've just deleted the wrong one, so gotta screw around more. :/ )
I'm CCing you so you will receive 2 copies of this message. The one that has "via luv-main" will support reply to list and the one that goes directly won't. Best to not "clean up" the addresses.
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or perhaps I need to check my filters, and make sure I'm filtering on the right headers (Gmail usually does a pretty good job of that). In any case, it is annoying to have the duplicate messages. That's why I prefer the reply list function. In my case, it would be better if I actually saw 2 copies of the message, as I am not, it is causing inconsistencies in what I'm seeing. And not cleaning up addresses just perpetuates this annoyance. ;) I prefer that if you want to reply to me direct, do so. If you want to reply to the list, do so. Doing both does send a mixed message. ;)
-- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail. BTW, i have .procmailrc rules to get rid of dupes....so if get CC-ed on a list reply, i see whichever one arrives first. This one deletes dupes: # delete duplicate messages :0 Wh: msgid.lock | formail -D 8192 msgid.cache These two rules store them in ~/mail/Misc/duplicates. # store duplicate messages in Misc/duplicates :0 Whc: msgid.lock | formail -D 16384 Misc/msgid.cache :0 a: Misc/duplicates
I prefer that if you want to reply to me direct, do so. If you want to reply to the list, do so. Doing both does send a mixed message. ;)
Different people have different preferences when it comes to getting dupe replies on list mail. some like it, some hate it, some don't care. I try to remember individual preferences as best i can, but mostly just default to sending either private or list mail, trimming the CC list. I always do a 'G' group reply in mutt and edit the To: and CC: headers manually in vim, because I don't always know until I'm ready to send the message whether it should be public or private. One of the reasons I hate From and Reply-To munging is that it takes that option away from me, or makes it more of a PITA than it was, or than it needs to be. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:52:37AM +1100, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail.
[...]
It may also be your individual Mailman preference, for instance, if you have "set duplicates off", and your subscribed address is in either the "To:" or "Cc:" field, then the list wont send you a copy at all.
On 15/01/2016 12:57 PM, Joel W. Shea via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:52:37AM +1100, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail.
[...]
It may also be your individual Mailman preference, for instance, if you have "set duplicates off", and your subscribed address is in either the "To:" or "Cc:" field, then the list wont send you a copy at all.
I'll have to check, though I don't recall changing preferences from the default. Thanks for the idea to check. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On 15/01/2016 12:57 PM, Joel W. Shea via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:52:37AM +1100, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail.
[...]
It may also be your individual Mailman preference, for instance, if you have "set duplicates off", and your subscribed address is in either the "To:" or "Cc:" field, then the list wont send you a copy at all.
I've changed the list options, I did have the list set to not send duplicates. Let's see if this works. Next will be to iron out my gmail filters, so direct emails don't go to the list folder. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
Craig Sanders via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail.
The gmail web interface will not show duplicates. (not sure if the same is true for imap or not) -- Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz> https://linuxpenguins.xyz/brian/
On 15/01/2016 1:49 PM, Brian May via luv-main wrote:
Craig Sanders via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail.
The gmail web interface will not show duplicates.
(not sure if the same is true for imap or not)
I use IMAP 99% of the time, time will tell, now that I've changed my Mailman options. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:41:44PM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
I use IMAP 99% of the time, time will tell, now that I've changed my Mailman options.
here's a test message for you. sent to the list and CC-ed directly to you. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On 15/01/2016 11:52 AM, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:50:22AM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
Foe some reason, I'm only receiving one copy. Maybe a Gmail oddity? Or
probably gmail.
I wouldn't be surprised, gmail does do a few unusual things, mostly not too annoying though (at least for me).
BTW, i have .procmailrc rules to get rid of dupes....so if get CC-ed on a list reply, i see whichever one arrives first.
Sounds like that would lead to more inconsistencies.
Different people have different preferences when it comes to getting dupe replies on list mail. some like it, some hate it, some don't care.
True. In my case, if I get both messages, it's a minor annoyance I can live with, but it appears I'm receiving only one, which is a major PITA, because of the behaviour inconsistencies.
I try to remember individual preferences as best i can, but mostly just default to sending either private or list mail, trimming the CC list.
I generally send to the list, unless I feel a need to go private, and usually use Reply List, to minimise the amount of fiddling with addresses. The number of times I go private is small enough that if I change my mind at the last minute, I can copy/paste the stuff I've typed into a new message addressed direct. Less work than editing address lists, because on average I send far more mail through the list than direct.
I always do a 'G' group reply in mutt and edit the To: and CC: headers manually in vim, because I don't always know until I'm ready to send the message whether it should be public or private.
That's always an option too.
One of the reasons I hate From and Reply-To munging is that it takes that option away from me, or makes it more of a PITA than it was, or than it needs to be.
I can understand that, I was recently caught out on a list with Reply-To: munging. No damage done, except a few confused "Bob"s, as my reply was intended to be a private message to a friend named Bob. :) -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 07:34:19 PM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
One of the reasons I hate From and Reply-To munging is that it takes that option away from me, or makes it more of a PITA than it was, or than it needs to be.
I can understand that, I was recently caught out on a list with Reply-To: munging. No damage done, except a few confused "Bob"s, as my reply was intended to be a private message to a friend named Bob. :)
For every setting there will be cases where people forget to specify their intent and use the default. If the default is private and the message is meant to be public you have to resend it. That is annoying but not a big deal. If the default is to the list and the message is meant to be private then the scope for damage is much greater. There is a reply to list option so it's not as if this will even take more time for someone who is acting deliberately. But I believe it's a great benefit to have the results of a poorly considered action have the smallest scope by default. I am sure that there is a correlation between sending an ill considered message and not carefully considering which reply option to use. On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 07:41:02 PM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote:
I've changed the list options, I did have the list set to not send duplicates. Let's see if this works. Next will be to iron out my gmail filters, so direct emails don't go to the list folder.
Does Gmail support addresses of the form vk3jed+luv@gmail.com to direct mail to IMAP folders? If so you can have your main address be subscribed but with delivery turned off (so you can post) and your secondary address enabled for delivery. It works for me. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Russell Coker via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
Does Gmail support addresses of the form vk3jed+luv@gmail.com to direct mail to IMAP folders? If so you can have your main address be subscribed but with delivery turned off (so you can post) and your secondary address enabled for delivery. It works for me.
I think it might. Can't remember the details now. Even better, however it supports filtering (and searching) based on the List-Id. I can't remember off hand how to do this, I think it might be something like searching for list:luv-main.lists.luv.asn.au and using that in the filter. -- Brian May <brian@linuxpenguins.xyz> https://linuxpenguins.xyz/brian/
On 15/01/2016 9:06 PM, Brian May via luv-main wrote:
Russell Coker via luv-main <luv-main@luv.asn.au> writes:
Does Gmail support addresses of the form vk3jed+luv@gmail.com to direct mail to IMAP folders? If so you can have your main address be subscribed but with delivery turned off (so you can post) and your secondary address enabled for delivery. It works for me.
I think it might. Can't remember the details now.
Even better, however it supports filtering (and searching) based on the List-Id.
I can't remember off hand how to do this, I think it might be something like searching for list:luv-main.lists.luv.asn.au and using that in the filter.
Filtering in gmail is easy. I have to check mine to make sure I'm filtering using the List-Id: header. One annoying feature of Mailman is that administrative messages also have the List-Id: header set, which means the administrative messages end up in the list's folder (which is a PITA - more so on another list I'm on, where I am a moderator). -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:34:19PM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
On 15/01/2016 11:52 AM, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
BTW, i have .procmailrc rules to get rid of dupes....so if get CC-ed on a list reply, i see whichever one arrives first.
Sounds like that would lead to more inconsistencies.
well, no. it's exactly what's happening in your situation: gmail is doing its own dupe-detection (presumably based on the Message-Id, just like my procmail rule). You're getting one or the other copy of the email (list copy or the directly-sent copy) first and that's the one you're seeing. The list has no control over that, and can not have any control or influence over that. BTW, given the extra processing and re-sending time required for the list copy, you're probably mostly seeing direct CCs first. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 08:42:32AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
well, no. it's exactly what's happening in your situation: gmail is doing its own dupe-detection [...] given the extra processing and re-sending time required for the list copy, you're probably mostly seeing direct CCs first.
I've confirmed the above behaviour.
On 16/01/2016 8:42 AM, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:34:19PM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
On 15/01/2016 11:52 AM, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
BTW, i have .procmailrc rules to get rid of dupes....so if get CC-ed on a list reply, i see whichever one arrives first.
Sounds like that would lead to more inconsistencies.
well, no. it's exactly what's happening in your situation: gmail is doing its own dupe-detection (presumably based on the Message-Id, just
Which is leading to inconsistent behaviour. Gmail is filtering the messages into the list, but only passing the direct copy on. Net result: inconsistent list behaviour, when seen from my end, because the list is now a mixture of list and direct messages. :/ -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 07:15:20PM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
well, no. it's exactly what's happening in your situation: gmail is doing its own dupe-detection (presumably based on the Message-Id,
Which is leading to inconsistent behaviour. Gmail is filtering the messages into the list, but only passing the direct copy on. Net result: inconsistent list behaviour, when seen from my end, because the list is now a mixture of list and direct messages. :/
yes, but it's not a problem that the list or the list-admin can do anything about - it's completely outside of their control or influence. you can add a filter rule to gmail so that if the msg is To: or CC: luv-main@luv.asn.au then it gets saved in the luv-main folder. That will get the direct messages that don't have the List-* headers. about the only other thing you can do is have a .signature or similar asking people NOT to send you CCs of list mail. some people may even read it and follow your wishes. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On 16/01/2016 9:21 PM, Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 07:15:20PM +1100, Tony Langdon wrote:
well, no. it's exactly what's happening in your situation: gmail is doing its own dupe-detection (presumably based on the Message-Id,
Which is leading to inconsistent behaviour. Gmail is filtering the messages into the list, but only passing the direct copy on. Net result: inconsistent list behaviour, when seen from my end, because the list is now a mixture of list and direct messages. :/
yes, but it's not a problem that the list or the list-admin can do anything about - it's completely outside of their control or influence.
you can add a filter rule to gmail so that if the msg is To: or CC: luv-main@luv.asn.au then it gets saved in the luv-main folder. That will get the direct messages that don't have the List-* headers.
That apparently seems to be the case, perhaps I did add such a filter after list mail apparently "missed" the luv-main folder (because it was actually direct mail, not via the list), and is the cause of the apparent inconsistency, because as I said (again!) everything _looks_ like it's coming from the list. But we do agree on one thing, the list administrator can't do anything about this issue, it's a combination of common practice (usually by persons with a brain dead MUA, but also some who see good reason to send both list and direct mail), and gmail quirks that is the source of the issue. :/
about the only other thing you can do is have a .signature or similar asking people NOT to send you CCs of list mail. some people may even read it and follow your wishes.
Might be an interesting social experiment. :D -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:26:42AM +0000, Russell Coker via luv-main wrote:
[...] the dmarc_moderation_action action that Joel requests gives different behavior for everyone using DKIM (even those not using DMARC) to those who don't. [...]
I can't reproduce that behaviour, according to my testing, it only takes action on messages with a "From:" field that contain a domain with a DMARC policy published, even if they are DKIM signed. I could understand if it was inadvertently acting where DMARC "p=none", but that would also be a bug.
participants (5)
-
Brian May -
Craig Sanders -
Joel W. Shea -
Russell Coker -
Tony Langdon