Mark Trickett via luv-talk wrote:
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.
It might well be that there is currently no satisfactory solution, short of working on the source code.
...can file a bug against upstream mailman, if there isn't one already. Then it might be fixed for you next time you dist-upgrade :-)