Hello Russell, On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 01:33 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 06:02:09 PM Anders Holmström wrote:
On 2015-11-16 06:26, Tim Connors wrote:
[...] And my LUV folder is now fugly with redundant department of redundancy style redundant information that everyone is from "via luv-talk".
+1 Adding "via luv-list" is a mistake, regardless of the merits, or otherwise, of munging the headers. I understand it's a way of saying "look! I've screwed with the headers" but is not necessary.
From: "Anders Holmström via luv-talk" <luv-talk@luv.asn.au> From: "Anders Holmström" <luv-talk@luv.asn.au>
So you're saying that of the above 2 options you prefer the second? Mailman doesn't appear to give that as an option, or if it does it's a site wide option not a per-list option.
Thank you for your time and effort to sort out Mailman to the extent you have achieved.
If I had been given a free choice between the 2 I would probably have chosen the second. But it might be that hacking the source is the only way of getting it. If there is a consense of opinion that the second option is the best way to do it then I will consider the option of hacking the source - but note that it's in a language that I don't use much and it may be beyond my skills in that area.
It might well be that there is currently no satisfactory solution, short of working on the source code. I can comprehend why you have done what you have, and why it garners so much dissatisfaction. Were I capable of coding, I would cheerfully try to assist in coding a better solution, one that was standards compliant, and less prone to falling afoul of the standards that are having to be developed and implemented to cope with spam and other malicious emails. I would ask whether there are other ways of verifying that the incoming contributions are legitimate, not spoofed sender spam. I am not asking you to spend a lot of time and effort, but to all the contributors to this to try to make positive suggestions as to what might be possible, even if not currently implemented in the available software. My contribution is that it will require an element of social engineering. That is too big for LUV alone to tackle, but as global citizens, maybe it is one to which we can add a small push. Regards, Mark Trickett