Search results for "Postorius" - Mailman-users

Hyperkitty error - not archiving

by Odhiambo Washington

I am seeing the error below and wondering what's the cause: Jul 25 13:35:05 2025 (944) Could not archive the message with id < CO1PR06MB798076961F096CAA4DB9A2FCBB59A(a)CO1PR06MB7980.namprd06.prod.outlook.com > Jul 25 13:35:05 2025 (944) archiving failed, re-queuing (mailing-list testlist.my.domain, message < CO1PR06MB798076961F096CAA4DB9A2FCBB59A(a)CO1PR06MB7980.namprd06.prod.outlook.com >) Jul 25 13:35:05 2025 (944) Exception in the HyperKitty archiver: <!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <head> <meta charset="UTF-8"> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge"> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"> <title>Server Error</title> <link rel="shortcut icon" href="/static/postorius/img/favicon.ico"> <link rel="stylesheet" href="/static/postorius/libs/bootstrap/css/bootstrap.min.css"> <link rel="stylesheet" href="/static/django-mailman3/css/main.css"> <link rel="stylesheet" href="/static/postorius/css/style.css"> </head> <body> <div class="container"> <h1>Server error</h1> <div class="alert alert-danger">An error occurred while processing your request.</div> </div> </body> </html> Jul 25 13:35:05 2025 (944) Traceback (most recent call last): File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.11/site-packages/mailman_hyperkitty/__init__.py", line 158, in _archive_message url = self._send_message(mlist, msg) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.11/site-packages/mailman_hyperkitty/__init__.py", line 228, in _send_message raise ValueError(result.text) ValueError: -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 In an Internet failure case, the #1 suspect is a constant: DNS. "Oh, the cruft.", egrep -v '^$|^.*#' ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :-) [How to ask smart questions: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]

3 weeks, 2 days

Re: Converting non-members to members

by Abhilash Raj

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018, at 2:55 AM, Alan So wrote: > Postorius is not currently exposing non-members management. Our Mailman > 2 users are currently using accept_these_nonmembers, > hold_these_nonmembers and reject_these_nonmembers. We know that > mailman import21 will change these to nonmembers entries in Mailman 3. > Since list owners will still want to manage them, we tend to move all > of them to members and turn off delivery status for them. I have been (slowly) working on exposing non-member management in Postorius (Mailman's web ui). I am hoping to complete it soon, but there is not clear ETA for it yet. I hope that it will be done soon. > However, we met some difficulties when we try to develop using mailman > client. Can you also please share the snippet of code you used for the these operations below so that we can help you fix them? > 1) If those non-members addresses already exist as members, we will > encounter error when we subscribe for them: urllib.error.HTTPError: > HTTP Error 409: b'Member already subscribed' Do you expect something else here? Any response with non-2XX status code is raised as HTTP Error in MailmanClient. > 2) We cannot change the moderation_action: urllib.error.HTTPError: HTTP > Error 400: b'Cannot convert parameters: moderation_action' I'd need to see the code fr this one, not sure what value did you pass here. You should be able to do: >>> member1.moderation_action = 'hold' >>> member1.save() Allowed values should be: - hold - reject - discard - accept - defer = 4 > 3) We cannot change the preference: urllib.error.HTTPError: HTTP Error > 400: b'Cannot convert parameters: delivery_status' This is again depends on what you are passing as value for the parameter. Allowed values are: - enabled - by_user (disabled by user) - by_bounces (disabled due to bounces) - by_moderator (disabled due to moderator) - unknown (disabled for unknown reason > > Are there any better ways to enable the list owners to manage those > previously configured nonmembers' addresses through the web? I am working on adding the support in the web ui, so yes, there will be better ways to manage those in future. > Otherwise, we probably need to have some manual effort to overcome the > above three issues. We know that we can always do the above manually > but we got a lot of lists to migrate to Mailman 3. > _______________________________________________ > Mailman-users mailing list -- mailman-users(a)mailman3.org > To unsubscribe send an email to mailman-users-leave(a)mailman3.org > https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/ > -- thanks, Abhilash Raj (maxking)

6 years, 7 months

Re: Docker Support Sucks

by Brian Carpenter

On 7/21/20 8:55 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 7/21/20 5:40 PM, Brian Carpenter wrote: > > Abhilash (@maxking) is one person and he has a $DayJob. We're all doing > the best we can. Well, I still need support. > This is not a Docker issue per se. It is a consequence of upgrading > Mailman core to 3.3.1+ and processing many old, stale, previously > unprocessed bounces. See > <https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/thread/…> I am not worried about the bounce issues at this point. I am just trying to get a membership list exported for a client. > >> So, I want to totally move away from the use of Docker (mainly because I have found it buggy and the support is simply lacking) and install Mailman 3 for this client from source. However I need to get an export of their list members. But of course, I can't. Rest API times out and I don't know how to apply the instructions I was given to fix it and I don't have days to way for one. So please help. >> >> I increased the gunicorn workers to 4, hoping that would allow me to do the CSV export. No. So was given these instructions: >> >> ### >> The issues seems to be due to timeout not due to high load. You want to increase the timeout for gunicorn and you can do that by specifying a gunicorn.ini config file: >> >> [webservice] >> configuration: /path/to/gunicorn.cfg >> >> and then in the gunicorn.cfg you can add >> >> [gunicorn] >> timeout = 90 >> graceful_timeout = 30 >> ### >> >> I applied the above changes to /opt/mailman/core/mailman-extra.cfg and created the gunicorn.cfg file. Restarted the docker container (mailman-core) and no access to Postorius due to no REST api. >> >> After restarting docker-mailman, I can't access Postorius due to the following error: >> >> ERROR 2020-07-20 20:16:27,351 15 postorius Mailman REST API not available > Is Mailman core running? If not, whats in core's mailman.log as to why not? It looks like but no error message in mailman.log. However I noted that the gunicorn process did not start. This is with the configuration line enabled in mailman-extra.cfg: # docker-compose restart mailman-core Restarting mailman-core ... done [root@nicu-net docker-mailman]# tail -f /opt/mailman/core/var/logs/mailman.log Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (22) in runner caught SIGTERM. Stopping. Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (25) out runner caught SIGTERM. Stopping. Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (25) out runner exiting. Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (21) command runner exiting. Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (22) in runner exiting. Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (24) nntp runner caught SIGTERM. Stopping. Jul 22 01:25:17 2020 (24) nntp runner exiting. [2020-07-22 01:25:19 +0000] [27] [INFO] Shutting down: Master Jul 22 01:25:21 2020 (1) Master stopped Jul 22 01:25:26 2020 (1) Master started Jul 22 01:25:44 2020 (27) rest runner started. Jul 22 01:25:44 2020 (26) pipeline runner started. Jul 22 01:25:44 2020 (20) bounces runner started. Jul 22 01:25:45 2020 (22) in runner started. Jul 22 01:25:45 2020 (28) retry runner started. Jul 22 01:25:46 2020 (29) virgin runner started. Jul 22 01:25:46 2020 (25) out runner started. Jul 22 01:25:46 2020 (23) lmtp runner started. Jul 22 01:25:46 2020 (24) nntp runner started. Jul 22 01:25:47 2020 (30) digest runner started. Jul 22 01:25:47 2020 (19) archive runner started. Jul 22 01:25:47 2020 (21) command runner started. This is with the configuration line disabled in mailman-extra.cfg: # docker-compose restart mailman-core Restarting mailman-core ... done [root@nicu-net docker-mailman]# tail -f /opt/mailman/core/var/logs/mailman.log Jul 22 01:27:49 2020 (1) Master stopped Jul 22 01:27:53 2020 (1) Master started Jul 22 01:28:10 2020 (30) digest runner started. Jul 22 01:28:10 2020 (29) virgin runner started. Jul 22 01:28:10 2020 (24) nntp runner started. Jul 22 01:28:10 2020 (25) out runner started. Jul 22 01:28:10 2020 (22) in runner started. Jul 22 01:28:11 2020 (28) retry runner started. Jul 22 01:28:11 2020 (27) rest runner started. [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [27] [INFO] Starting gunicorn 19.9.0 [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [27] [INFO] Listening at: http://172.19.199.2:8001 (27) [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [27] [INFO] Using worker: sync [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [32] [INFO] Booting worker with pid: 32 [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [33] [INFO] Booting worker with pid: 33 [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [34] [INFO] Booting worker with pid: 34 [2020-07-22 01:28:11 +0000] [35] [INFO] Booting worker with pid: 35 Jul 22 01:28:11 2020 (19) archive runner started. Jul 22 01:28:11 2020 (21) command runner started. Jul 22 01:28:12 2020 (23) lmtp runner started. Jul 22 01:28:12 2020 (20) bounces runner started. Jul 22 01:28:12 2020 (26) pipeline runner started. -- Please let me know if you need further assistance. Thank you for your business. We appreciate our clients. Brian Carpenter EMWD.com -- EMWD's Knowledgebase: https://clientarea.emwd.com/index.php/knowledgebase EMWD's Community Forums http://discourse.emwd.com/

5 years

Re: Core, Hyperkitty and Postorius releases

by Odhiambo Washington

On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 12:24 AM Abhilash Raj <maxking(a)asynchronous.in> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021, at 2:16 PM, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > > On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 12:01 AM Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> wrote: > > > > > On 5/14/21 1:54 PM, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > > > > > > > > /usr/local/include/sass > > > > > > > > That is the only thing found that is in the base system. > > > > > > And that's the one you want. What is it's mode? > > > > > > > root@gw:/usr/home/wash # ls -al /usr/local/include/sass > > total 104 > > drwxr-xr-x 2 root wheel 512 Apr 16 16:49 . > > drwxr-xr-x 176 root wheel 10240 Apr 19 18:05 .. > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 2369 Apr 8 11:08 base.h > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 10742 Apr 8 11:08 context.h > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 6632 Apr 8 11:08 functions.h > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 6489 Apr 8 11:08 values.h > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 198 Apr 8 11:08 version.h > > > > I imagined I needed an executable. > > This sounds like a result of you running `pip3 install sass`, probably > with sudo > which failed mid-way due to the exception you posted above. > Closer to the truth! It failed. I was running this from within the virtualenv. > Which OS are you using? FreeBSD. > On debian/ubuntu, you can install: > > sudo apt install sassc > Do I need to install sassc in the base OS or in the virtualenv? > I am not exactly sure how it got removed during your upgrade > to the new version of Mailman since it shouldn't affect your system > packages. > The funny part is my MM3 used to run. Mark took so much hand-holding for me to get it running. Then one day I used the update process and things got hosed. The happy part is that I had not put any production lists on MM3 as I hadn't developed the confidence of managing it. Did you install Mailman initially using system packages or instructions > provided at [1]? > > [1]: > https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/install/virtualenv.html#virtualenv-inst… No. I relied on https://wiki.list.org/DOC/Mailman%203%20installation%20experience. This is way back! Your new link is recent, no? -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 "Oh, the cruft.", egrep -v "^$|^.*#" :-)

4 years, 3 months

Re: remove website example.com via django interface

by Odhiambo Washington

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 6:09 PM Alexander Inzinger-Zrock via Mailman-users < mailman-users(a)mailman3.org> wrote: > remove website 'example.com' via django interface > or > "how to rush jourself off your feet" > > > **Disclaimer: don't try this at home** > > > in believe to replace the display of 'example.com' in the > postorius-webinterface i logged into django-interface, under 'website' > (very bottom of the left menu) i added my new website and then deleted > 'example.com'. > > Result: i can't access my webinterfaces any more, neither django nor > postorius. > > > Questions: > > 1. Does somebody know about the correct approach to change the displayed > url in the postorius-webinterface? > The displayed URL should be the one you configured in Nginx or Apache. example.com is usually SITE_ID=1. It's possible to rename it in Django admin UI to whatever you want - like mywebsite.name > 2. does somebody perhaps know how to revert those removal via CLI or > other ways? > ``` SQL: select * from django_site; ``` Whatever ID shows for the one you created, stick that ID to settings.py and restart mailmanweb. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 In an Internet failure case, the #1 suspect is a constant: DNS. "Oh, the cruft.", egrep -v '^$|^.*#' ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :-) [How to ask smart questions: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]

4 months, 3 weeks

Re: Fwd: Re: Removing a mail addresses and users

by Brian Carpenter

Allan Hansen wrote: > Some dedicated and skilled developers are currently investing heavily in a replacement > for Postorius, but I really believe that any work is better spent transforming Mailman > Core etc. into a true account-based system. Then, and only then, will it make sense to > build new and better interfaces on top, as, without a healthy core, such interface will > currently may have to inherit the confusion and disconnect that currently is so > aggravating. Mark said it well. The problem is not with core (which I love very much). The issue you are having is with the decision to use Django. With Affinity, I believe we are using Mailman 3 core to it's (almost) full potential. For instance, the server owner (site admin in Postorius terms) can delete a user with one button and that user is really gone. You can immediately register again with Affinity using the same email and you will have no problems re-registering. If the deleted user was subscribed to multiple lists and were not unsubscribed, then those lists will be waiting for him if/when he re-registers. So our decision to go with a new admin U.I. for Mailman 3 core, imo, has been a great decision. Mailman core is wonderful. One improvement we made is a user can delete their Affinity account but still remain subscribed. They also have the choice to unsubscribe from all their lists at the time of account deletion as well.

5 years, 2 months

[MM3-users]New Mailman 3 users list

by Mark Sapiro

I'm happy to announce a new list for Mailman 3 users and others interested in Mailman 3. This list is running on a new Mailman 3 installation at lists.mailman3.org. The list's posting address is <mailman-users(a)mailman3.org>. The list's info page is <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/> and its archives are at <https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/>. The top level Postorius page is <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/> and the HyperKitty archiver is at <https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/>. You can subscribe by email by sending a blank message to <mailman-users-join(a)mailman3.org> and responding to the resulting confirmation request. You can also subscribe by going to the info page at <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/>, logging in and subscribing. Log in offers three options. There are Google and Facebook OAuth2 login links on the log in page to log in with a Google or Facebook account, and there is a 'Login by email' link to login via Persona with any address you register and confirm with Persona. This is a new installation of Mailman 3 so there are still kinks to work out, and any issues can be discussed on the list or reported to the trackers at <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/issues>, <https://gitlab.com/mailman/hyperkitty/issues> or <https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/issues> as appropriate. Enjoy! -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

9 years, 4 months

delete examples.com site

by enrique.terrazas＠utsa.edu

Hello, I've been working on setting up Mailman3 on a RHEL 7.5 vm using the guides and documentation found here: http://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/index.html https://mailman.readthedocs.io/en/latest/README.html http://docs.mailman3.org/projects/postorius/en/latest/index.html http://docs.mailman3.org/projects/mailmanclient/en/latest/README.html https://hyperkitty.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman-hyperkitty nginx is serving the Django applications via uwsgi. I was able to get mailman, postorius + hyperkitty, running and test sending out email verifications. In an attempt to set the default domain to something other than example.com I deleted the site: example.com, I did have another site. Unfortunately, this seems to have broken the Django applications. At the moment I am preparing to delete the virtual environment and set things up again. Unless there is something that can be done in the current virtual environment to "reset" things back to start. I was also running into an issue where the verification emails were successfully sent out. The url to verify the email looks like this: http://my.domain.com:8000/accounts/confirm-email/xxxxxxxxxxxx/ Replacing my.domain.com with the domain I added. How can I get the outgoing verification emails to not reference port 8000? If I take that same link and remove the port, I get the desired page. Port 8000 is blocked at our sites permitter firewall, I don't necessarily want to open it. I'd rather the URL just obfuscate the port and send it to https... Thank you in advance for your attention and assistance. Best regards, Enrique J. Terrazas

6 years, 10 months

Re: Where does sender postorius@ come from?

by Odhiambo Washington

The addresses are defined in Django settings if I'm not mistaken. And callout isn't evil. On Wed, Jun 7, 2023, 23:31 Jens Günther <jens.guenther(a)posteo.de> wrote: > I just realized, that mails for registering an account and/or resetting > ones password are obviously sent from postorius@SERVE_FROM_DOMAIN. Why > are they not sent from MAILMAN_ADMIN_EMAIL? > > The problem is: > - an account is trying to register with a mailaddress from a > HostEurope-server > - HostEurope-Servers are doing Sender-Callouts (bad practise :-D) to > verify that a mailaccount exists > - mail is then bouncing, b/c those are not answered (shoud I?): > status=bounced (host [80.237.138.5] said: 550-Sender verification is > required but failed. > - bounce then can't be processed, since mailaccount does not exist :-D > status=bounced (mail for SERVE_FROM_DOMAIN loops back to myself) > > Am I missing something are shouldn't it be better to send those mails > from MAILMAN_ADMIN_EMAIL? (I don't want to mess with these sender > callouts or change anything, HostEurope has been a little bit of a pain > in the ... with mailinglists and not much help at all). > > Thanks in advance, Jens. > _______________________________________________ > Mailman-users mailing list -- mailman-users(a)mailman3.org > To unsubscribe send an email to mailman-users-leave(a)mailman3.org > https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/ > Archived at: > https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/message… > > This message sent to odhiambo(a)gmail.com >

2 years, 2 months

Re: Avoiding non-members to be saved.

by Mark Sapiro

On 8/7/21 4:55 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Guillermo Hernandez (Oldno7) via Mailman-users writes: > > > Yesterday I had a problem with a private list. A spammer sent a mail > > forging one address that was a non-member (in fact was an "accept this > > no subscriber mails" from mailman 2.1 import) with very bad intentions > > and it was distributed. > > If you upgrade from Mailman 2 to Mailman 3, the accept_these_nonmembers > list for each list is grandfathered into the Mailman 3 list (from > rules/moderation.py): > > # Check the '*_these_nonmembers' properties first. XXX These are > # legacy attributes from MM2.1; their database type is 'pickle' and > # they should eventually get replaced. > for action_name in ('accept', 'hold', 'reject', 'discard'): > legacy_attribute_name = '{}_these_nonmembers'.format( > action_name) > > > There were no list of "accept this non members" in the Postorius > > config > > If there is no such list in Postorius, I would guess that some > developer thought "OK, this is a legacy feature and I'll get back to > it when we move it to the proper database" (unfortunate, but most of > us have open-subscription member-posts-only lists, and the current > workflow seems to work well, so this feature may not be so salient). Moderation in MM 3 works as follows: Is poster address a member. If so apply the member's moderation action, else Does poster address appear or match a pattern in the legacy (accept|hold|reject|discard)_these_nonmembers (first match in that order). If so, apply the appropriate action, else If the poster address is not a non-member, add it as a nonmember and apply the default nonmember moderation. > > I think it is solved now (deleting all and putting to hold just the > > non-members addresses that I would want to pass messages on) > > This should not be necessary, unless there were pre-approved addresses > that are no longer appropriate. But Mailman can't know that! The import21 process imports *_these_nonmembers by adding any regexps to the corresponding MM 3 *_these_nonmembers and adding any addresses as nonmembers with the appropriate moderation action. > > The fact is that any sender address of mails sent to the list is saved > > as a "non member", and it make me nervous as it will grow despite it is > > a legitimate message or not. This is the way MM 3 works. The only reason *_these_nonmembers exists in MM 3 is to support the legacy regexps from MM 2.1. For non-regexp addresses the address is a nonmember with the appropriate moderation action. I actually find this convenient. When a nonmember posts spam to a list and that spam is held, I discard the spam in Postorius and at the same time set the nonmember's moderation action to discard so I never see any more from that address. Also, when someone who I recognize as a list member posts from an alternate nonmember address, I can accept that post and set the nonmember address moderation action to default processing. > As far as I can see there is no other rule except that legacy rule > (and the rule that accepts all posts, which is rarely used) that will > accept a post from nonmembers. As I note above, nonmembers and members alike have a moderation action which can be any of Hold, Reject (with notice), Discard (no notice), Accept (without any further checks), Default Processing (continue with additioal checks) or the list's default action for (non)members. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

4 years

Mailman-users search results for query "Postorius"