April 2021 - Mailman-users - lists.mailman3.org

Non-ascii characters missing from Pipermail archive txt and gz downloads
by Mark Dale April 20, 2021

April 20, 2021

Mailman 2.1.34 Debian 10 Postfix Hi I'm hoping someone can shine a light on character encoding issue I've encountered. A plain-text email with non-ascii characters in the body gets posted to the list. As per Mark Sapiro's guide I've captured the incoming message to file. - https://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users@python.org/msg73469.html The message is received by Mailman with the non-ascii characters displaying correctly. The header of that message has: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-AU Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In the list's mbox file and archive webpage, the message displays the non-ascii characters correctly. In the archive's downloaded .txt (and also .gz) file, the non-ascii characters are missing and displayed as "?". I've copied the message text in below, from both the correct one from the email and the erroneous .txt file. Hopefully they won't get scrambled up when I send this. Any advice on getting the non-ascii characters written into the archive .txt file would be gratefully received. Thanks, Mark === Message text as okay in mbox and as shown on the archive webpage === If one goes by the definition of veḷippaṭai as given in the Tamil Lexicon that the meaning of an ambiguous word should be disambiguated by a qualifying word, then aruvi āmpal does not conform to that definition since in the case of aruvi āmpal in Patiṟṟuppattu 63, aruvi is really made up of aru+vi, a compound. Moreover, the expression aṭai aṭuppu aṟiyā is already there to clarify that āmpal is a number and not a flower. Thus, aruvi simply provides information in addition to aṭai aṭuppu aṟiyā that āmpal is not a flower. The modern commentator Aruḷampalavaṉār also does not call it veḷippaṭai. === === Message text with missing characters in te archive's txt and gz downloads == If one goes by the definition of ve?ippa?ai as given in the Tamil Lexicon that the meaning of an ambiguous word should be disambiguated by a qualifying word, then aruvi ?mpal does not conform to that definition since in the case of aruvi ?mpal in Pati??uppattu 63, aruvi is really made up of aru+vi, a compound. Moreover, the expression a?ai a?uppu a?iy? is already there to clarify that ?mpal is a number and not a flower. Thus, aruvi simply provides information in addition to a?ai a?uppu a?iy? that ?mpal is not a flower. The modern commentator Aru?ampalava??r also does not call it ve?ippa?ai. ===

2 2

Long lines in mail composed by HyperKitty
by Stephen J. Turnbull April 19, 2021

April 19, 2021

Hi, [I prefer discussion be directed to mailman-developers, so Reply-To is set. But if you're not subscribed to -developers, following up here is OK, and I'll eventually summarize to -developers. Just don't followup to both.] I just noticed that among the agents that send non-conformant long lines[1] is HyperKitty. Nowadays violating the 80 octet limit is common and MUAs mostly handle it, but the 1000 octet limit is enforced by many MTAs[2] I think that HyperKitty should format mail per RFC 3676 format=flowed https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3676#section-4. However, I don't use "modern" (aka crappy HTML-oriented) clients, so I don't know whether they handle format=flowed properly. Discussion greatly desired. Steve Footnotes: [1] RFC 5321: MTAs MAY impose a limit >= 1000 octets including CRLF. RFC 5322: MUST be <= 1000 octets including CRLF, SHOULD be <= 80 octets including CRLF. [2] In practice, most (?) MTAs just break the line at 998 octets and insert CRLF rather than reject the message. I assume they would break happily in the middle of a multi-byte character, i.e., any non-ASCII in a UTF-8 text.

1 0

GNU Mailman condemns reinstatement of RMS
by Abhilash Raj April 13, 2021

April 13, 2021

To the Mailman community, The GNU Mailman Steering Committee condemns the reinstatement of Richard M. Stallman (RMS) to the Board of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), and has taken the following actions: 1. On behalf of the GNU Mailman project, signed the letter on GitHub[1] calling for the removal of the entire FSF Board, as well as RMS himself. 2. Started exploring ways to move our financial assets, for decades managed by the FSF, to new management. The management fees are small, but this is an important symbolic protest. 3. Started exploring how to leave the GNU Project. On the one hand, if we leave but GNU wants to maintain a "GNU Mailman" project, we cannot stop them, confusing users. On the other hand, RMS is leader of the GNU Project, and has intervened in Mailman affairs on many occasions. We should forestall this in the future. We wish to explain our actions to the community. Although free exchange of software among users is a practice that goes back to days of the earliest general purpose computers, RMS was the first to propose a complete free software distribution, and is the acknowledged founder of the Free Software movement. Even leaders of the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) acknowledge this. We all owe him a debt for this. Nevertheless, the movement has matured and thrived, spawning the competitive open source movement, with whose philosophy Mailman is more closely aligned. While we acknowledge our debt to RMS, we don't need him any longer. And unfortunately, he has become both a symbol and a source of the toxicity in tech communities. The FSF Board did the right thing by accepting RMS's resignation. They did the wrong thing by reinstating him. RMS has a long history of abusive behavior and toxic political positions. A small part of it is described in the open letter on GitHub[1] and its references[2], and several members of the Steering Committee have observed it directly. All of us have heard stories directly from those who were abused or observed it directly. His political positions are public, for example his support of pedophiles. He claims that he in no way supports abusive relationships with children, yet refuses to acknowledge that children are generally in no position to provide consent, an evasive and highly toxic position. There is no question: RMS is toxic. We came for mailing list management, but we stayed for the community. We have a right to protect our community by dissociating it from toxic influences. We do not want our project associated with such a person, nor to provide economic resources to organizations that promote him to leadership positions. We are taking these actions to protect our community, both the narrow community of Mailman developers and users, and the broader open source community, from his toxic behavior and from the reputational damage that will come from helping to enable him. While we have no information suggesting that other members of the FSF Board are similarly toxic as individuals, as a group they enabled RMS for decades, and now have taken an explicit step in enabling him again. If they want to regain their position of respect and acceptance in our community, they must acknowledge their error, and we don't see -- given their reinstatement of RMS himself -- how they can do so convincingly while maintaining their positions on the Board. They must resign, and a new Board composed, to demonstrate their sincerity. What they do is up to them, of course, but if they do not take radical steps, we will continue to consider association with the FSF a threat to our community. For the Mailman community, Abhilash Raj (project leader) Mark Sapiro Stephen J. Turnbull Aurélien Bompard Terri Oda Barry Warsaw John Viega (founder) [1] Text and signatures: https://rms-open-letter.github.io [2] Appendix to the letter: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix Related statements: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/statements

1 0

Resetting users' password for them?
by Duane Raymond April 10, 2021

April 10, 2021

Hi. I have quite a few users who when they reset their password, don't receive their password reset email. It works fine for many, so they are going out. But for those who they don't go out for, I was hoping to get their password reset key/token from the database tables and send it to them...only thing is I can't find it in there! )it may not be there). So what would you suggest for enabling people to reset their password when the system email isn't received: - Is there a way to get the reset token so I can send it manually - if so, where/how do I find it? - Would enabling social login be a work around for this problem? - Anything else you can suggest? Cheers, Duane

3 3

SpamAssassin header confusion
by skenny＠scss.tcd.ie April 10, 2021

April 10, 2021

I'm struggling to understand an aspect of SpamAssassin headers, and would greatly appreciate any help. Here is my scenario: One of my mailbox addresses - say addr1(a)somewhere.com - is a member of a Mailman 3 mailing list. I send a spam email (e.g. one with the GTUBE string) to the list from a different address. My mail server (Postfix/Amavis/Spamassassin) correctly identifies the mail as spam, and, appropriately, adds several spam-related headers - X-Spam-Flag, X-Spam-Score etc. I can see, from the copy of the email that lands in /var/lib/amavis/virusmails on the mail server, that those headers are indeed present. The mail message is handed off to Mailman for processing. The list in question has nonmember_default_action set to "defer", so Mailman sends the message on to each member address. However, the message, as it appears in the inbox of addr1(a)somewhere.com, contains no X-Spam- headers. The only indication of the message's spammish nature is in the Subject line, which has been prepended with the familiar string "***SPAM*****". On the face of it, it looks like Mailman has removed the X-Spam-* headers. If that's so, I don't understand why. I would be very grateful if anyone could help me figure out what is going on here. Thanks in advance, Stephen

2 4

Database deadlock when trying to delete a member.
by Simon Coggins April 9, 2021

April 9, 2021

Hi, I’ve got a strange error. I migrated from mailman 2.1 to 3 using the migration guide on the website and things have been working fine. But I’m in the process of testing the new syncmembers command to replace some inhouse mailman API code we wrote. I’ve tracked my problem down to what appears to be a deadlock in the postgresql database. When trying to delete certain users the SQL query hangs and never returns. After doing some tracing and tracking it down to the database, I enabled DB logging of all queries and saw that the following query was never returning: DELETE FROM member WHERE member.id = 166814 If I try to run it manually I get the same issue, in psql it never returns. mailman=# explain analyze DELETE FROM member WHERE member.id = 166814; [… 60 seconds passes…] ^CCancel request sent ERROR: canceling statement due to user request CONTEXT: while deleting tuple (2998,72) in relation "member" I’m just wondering if there are any commands or scripts I can run to verify the database and it’s constraints to see if there is some error in the database data? Or where you’d recommend I go from here? It only impacts the user on this specific list. If I add this user to another list and remove them, everything works fine. This is on a test system so I can do various testing. I’m trying to find the root cause so that I can verify my production system isn’t impacted by the same thing. Setup Details: OS: Oracle Linux 7 (Redhat) Installed using pip via virtualenv talking to a local pgsql database on the same box. Data was migrated from a mailman 2.1 install into mailman3 using migration instructions on the website. PIP Modules versions: django-mailman3 1.3.5 mailman 3.3.3 mailman-hyperkitty 1.1.0 mailmanclient 3.3.2 postorius 1.3.4 psycopg2-binary 2.8.5 RPM packages: postgresql12-12.6-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 postgresql12-server-12.6-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 postgresql12-libs-12.6-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 postgresql12-devel-12.6-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 -Simon

4 13

Filter who can send on mailman3 list?
by marcus.granath＠gmail.com April 8, 2021

April 8, 2021

Hi! I have a mailman3 mailing list which I admin, and I would like setup the following rule. Me and 3 of my team mates (who are part of the mailman3 list) should be able to send on the list as well as an "no-reply" user, others on the mailman3 list should only be able to receive the e-mails (and of course be able to unsubscribe themself). Both the: "Default action to take when a non-member posts to thelist" and the "Default action to take when a member posts to the list" is set to "Default processing", and I tried to setup actions in the "Header Filters" - but no really success.. :-( So what I basically try do achieve is to have only the following addresses to be allowed to send announcements (e-mails) on the mailman3 list, and all others that are member of the mailman3 list will just receive the e-mails. The usual "announcements" are sent out as the "no-reply" address (that actually are not really part of the mailman3 list) ;-) no-reply(a)abc.com ("fake address" that actually are not really part of the mailing-list) peter(a)abc.com david(a)abc.com marcus(a)abc.com How to achieve this kind of filter with mailman3?

6 12

Configuration variables in Docker
by Jens Günther April 8, 2021

April 8, 2021

Hey there, we installed the latest Docker version of Mailman3 and it seems to work for now. But I have 2 problems with configuration: ## DJANGO_ALLOWED_HOSTS Here it says, that allowed hosts can be added: https://asynchronous.in/docker-mailman/web/ How de we add multiple hosts? Did I miss something? When we set 1 URL, everything works (with 2(!) Domains, since SERVE_FROM_DOMAIN is the first one). Is there a way I miss to input multiple hosts, that the variable is an array? We tried: - DJANGO_ALLOWED_HOSTS=example1.com,example2.com - DJANGO_ALLOWED_HOSTS='example1.com, example2.com' - DJANGO_ALLOWED_HOSTS=example1.com example2.com - DJANGO_ALLOWED_HOSTS=example1.com,\nexample2.com And I think some more, but never works. The corresponding config file says: ALLOWED_HOSTS = [ "localhost", # Archiving API from Mailman, keep it. # "lists.your-domain.org", # Add here all production URLs you may have. "mailman-web", "172.19.199.3", os.environ.get('SERVE_FROM_DOMAIN'), os.environ.get('DJANGO_ALLOWED_HOSTS'), ] -> how is it possible to add an array for multiple Domains? -> if not possible, shall we provide a fix that it is? ## FILTER_VHOST I want this variable to be true in my container. When I set it as a starting variable like the other configuration options, then the variable in the container seems to be set: <code> # export | grep FILTER_VHOST= declare -x FILTER_VHOST="True" </code> But surely it still is set to false in mm-web-container: <code> # cat settings.py | grep FILTER_VHOST FILTER_VHOST = False </code> -> is it ok to put the variable like that!? -> if not, how can it be done, that it is preserved on restarting the container? -> if I see it right, it could be then something like: <code> FILTER_VHOST = os.environ.get('FILTER_VHOST_DOCKER'), </code> -> with some more exceptions-handling, it might work? Thanks in advance, Jens.

2 1

Seeting "Maximum number of recipients"
by David Partain April 8, 2021

April 8, 2021

Hi, I have an (admittedly old) version of Postorius in my install[1] on an Ubuntu 18.04 machine. Most things work fine. However, my version doesn't seem to have a way to set the maximum number of recipients under Message Acceptance, and mail is getting shunted because there was a setting for lists on the old mailman2 lists that I migrated over. If I'm going to avoid shunting, I have to change the value :) Since it isn't in Postorius, how should I change it? I'm frankly terrified of screwing things up on my production system, so any help would be appreciated. Cheers, David [1] python-django-postorius - 1.1.2-3

2 1

Maximum number of recipients Setting
by Brian Carpenter April 4, 2021

April 4, 2021

I have run several tests. It looks like on the 'Maximum number of recipients' setting, a 2 means 1. If I set it to 2, I can have the listname(a)listdomain.com only. If I have a CC, it comes to me for moderation. If I set it to a 3, I can send out to listname(a)listdomain.com plus a CC. If I set it to 3 and add 2 CC's plus the listname(a)listdomain.com address, it comes to me for moderation. -- Brian Carpenter Harmonylists.com Emwd.com

3 3