Search results for "Postorius" - Mailman-users

Re: Verification Failed Error

by Odhiambo Washington

Hi Abhilash, Can I use the instructions at https://github.com/maxking/docker-mailman with a MySQL database instead of PostgreSQL? I am looking at the following block in docker-compose.yaml: database: environment: POSTGRES_DB: mailmandb POSTGRES_USER: mailman POSTGRES_PASSWORD: mailmanpass restart: always image: postgres:9.6-alpine volumes: - /opt/mailman/database:/var/lib/postgresql/data networks: mailman: ipv4_address: 172.19.199.4 I'd like to change those to use MySQL. Maybe you should also add an example on the site for these?? On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 03:25, Abhilash Raj <maxking(a)asynchronous.in> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018, at 4:05 PM, brian(a)emwd.com wrote: > > Abhilash Raj wrote: > > > It should be pointing to Exim running on host, so > > > > > > EMAIL_HOST = 172.19.199.1 > > > > That fixed the network not found error. Thank you for your help there. > > > > Now I am back to the verification error: > > > > "smtplib.SMTPRecipientsRefused: {'brian(a)emwd.com': (550, b'Verification > > failed for <postorius(a)host.name.com>\nUnknown user\nSender verify > > failed')}" > > > > I am at a lost on how to get exim to allow mail sent from > > postorius(a)host.name.com. Obviously host.name.com is the mm3 domain that > > I am using. > > A quick search says that Exim is trying to verify that ` > postorius(a)host.name.com` > is a real mailbox (which I am assuming it is not), and rejecting the email > coming > from Postorius. > > You probably have > > verify = sender > > somewhere in your exim.conf, which is causing this. You can either modify > the > > DEFAULT_FROM_EMAIL > > in your settings_local.py so that it is a real address that Exim can > verify, or, > you can remove verify = sender from your Exim configuration. 2nd option > might > not be the best if you want to properly combat spam. > > Exim experts would be able to help you better with this. > > > > > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > > 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) > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 "Oh, the cruft.", grep ^[^#] :-)

7 years, 10 months

Help request, almost got it going, but ....

by Claus-Justus Heine

First: thanks for all those development work, I am aware of the fact that this is free software and most of the development probably happened in someones spare-time. I have some problems: - I tried to install mailman v3. "Read the (non) docs" was of little help, but I got to some partly success following the commands in the scripts in the docker image at https://github.com/maxking/docker-mailman Things seemed to work out, I generated a test-list "Playground" and now I am just in the progress to click through all the configuration options in the the postorius Web-GUI. So far so good Now I read the "Message Acceptance" tab AND here is the problem: Seemingly, at some point in the deep dungeons of the source code the "Acceptable aliases" Text-Box is not interpreted correctly. Specifically, at the start it contains the string [] When then changing something int the "Message Acceptance" tab, an error shows up in the web-page (but no-where in the logs) "An error occured: []" and the bogus [] is restored. I tried to dig into the source code, and well, the data source of the text-field is an array or list of acceptable email-adresses. But seemingly finally at some point in the source code an empty list is not converted to the empty string, but to the string []. I can get rid of the error message "An error occured: []" by inserting an email-at '@' at just some place in the input box, this yields (clicking "Save changes" again and againg ...): [u"[u'@']"] [u'[u\'[u"[u\\\'@\\\']"]\']'] [u'[u\'[u\\\'[u\\\\\\\'[u"[u\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'@\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\']"]\\\\\\\']\\\']\']'] and so on. Unfortunately, I did not find the location of this bug, although I was finally able to add some "foobar" string to the already bogus web-output. Any help would be appreciated. BTW: * where is the bug-tracker for mailman3? * The documentation is really, well, close to non existent. Personally, I think the name of the URL "read-the-docs" is almost cynical. Guess I give up on it, it just does not seem to be ready for production. This was (following the docker stuff at githb) with Pythong3: mailman==3.1.0 mailman-hyperkitty==1.1.0 Python2: mailmanclient==3.1.0 postorius==1.1.0 hyperkitty==1.1.1 django-mailman3==1.1.0 Here I realize a slight version difference between the hyperkitty stuff. But this is a bug in postorius. So what. Thanks for any help, cheers Claus -- Claus-Justus Heine himself(a)claus-justus-heine.de http://www.claus-justus-heine.de/ Schatzmeister der Camerata Academica Freiburg e.V. --- www.cafev.de

9 years, 2 months

Re: Mailman3 not working following distribution upgrade from Debian 10 to 11.

by gordon＠dickens.com

Thanks Mark! Here is the Traceback from the error: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/core/handlers/exception.py", line 34, in inner response = get_response(request) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/core/handlers/base.py", line 115, in _get_response response = self.process_exception_by_middleware(e, request) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/core/handlers/base.py", line 113, in _get_response response = wrapped_callback(request, *callback_args, **callback_kwargs) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/views/generic/base.py", line 71, in view return self.dispatch(request, *args, **kwargs) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/postorius/views/generic.py", line 74, in dispatch return super(MailingListView, self).dispatch(request, *args, **kwargs) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/views/generic/base.py", line 97, in dispatch return handler(request, *args, **kwargs) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/postorius/views/list.py", line 326, in get primary_email = set_preferred(request.user, mm_user) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/postorius/utils.py", line 64, in set_preferred primary_email = EmailAddress.objects.get_primary(user) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/allauth/account/managers.py", line 30, in get_primary return self.get(user=user, primary=True) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/db/models/manager.py", line 82, in manager_method return getattr(self.get_queryset(), name)(*args, **kwargs) File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/db/models/query.py", line 419, in get raise self.model.MultipleObjectsReturned( Exception Type: MultipleObjectsReturned at /mailman3/lists/testing.dickens.com/ Exception Value: get() returned more than one EmailAddress -- it returned 3!\ Thanks for your help! Gordon

4 years, 8 months

Re: Your Dashboard

by Allan Hansen

All, Our site has over 50 lists and several moderators are responsible for multiple lists. In addition to a dashboard like described here I would like to have a ‘comment’ field next to each request, so tha the moderator can keep track of the status of each. Our approval process involves multiple steps. Time to visit gitlab? Yours, Allan Hansen hansen(a)rc.org > On Feb 11, 2020, at 12:26 , Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> wrote: > > On 2/11/20 11:00 AM, Mark Dadgar wrote: >> On Feb 11, 2020, at 10:32 AM, Torge Riedel <torgeriedel(a)gmx.de> wrote: >>> everytime I receive a mail for moderation it says: >>> >>> At your convenience, visit your dashboard to approve or deny the >>> request. >>> >>> So, I am wondering where this "dashboard" might be. We are managing 11 different lists (small scenario I think) and currently we have to navigate to each list and its page of mails to moderate. > > > There's no overall dashboard per se. The message actually refers to > whatever web UI you use to manage the list. The default template for > this message is non-specific because it comes from Mailman core, and > core doesn't know if you are using Postorius or some other web > management system or non at all, and even if it were to assume > Postorius, it doesn't know the URL. > > >>> I like the idea of a "dashboard" were you can see a summary of mails to moderate and other stuff to have an eye on. And directly do this from this dashbard. Which is convenience. >>> >>> If it is already there, where do I find it? If not, do others also find such a dashboard helpful? > > > As I said, there is no overall dashboard in Postorius, just the > individual list management pages. > > >> This is actually a regression from Mailman 2.x. That train included a link to the relevant dashboard in the email, which I miss terribly. > > > I explained above why this is the case, but you can fix it. You do so by > making a sitewide template for this message. In the case of this list, > we have a template in Mailman's var/templates/site/en/ directory (the > default directory for sitewide english templates. This template is named > list:admin:action:post.txt and its content on this site is: > >> As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the >> following mailing list posting: >> >> List: $listname >> From: $sender_email >> Subject: $subject >> >> The message is being held because: >> >> $reasons >> >> At your convenience, visit >> https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/$list_id/held_messages > > > Of course, in your case the <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/> part > of the URL will be different. > > See > <https://wiki.list.org/DOC/Mailman%203%20installation%20experience#Templates> > for the other templates I also install. > > You can also put domain specific templates in > var/templates/domains/$domain/$lc/ which override site templates for the > domain and list specific templates in var/templates/lists/$list_id/$lc/ > which override site and domain templates for the list, and you can also > set list templates via Postorius. > > -- > Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, > San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan > _______________________________________________ > 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/

6 years, 8 months

Re: Error -- postorius Un-handled exception

by Mark

> > The issue you're dealing with in that case is this change in > > PostgreSQL-15 discussed in this blog: > > > https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com/en/error-permission-denied-schema-publi… ********************** > If you have a Mailman-only host, with a Mailman-only PostgreSQL, or > The Cabal of equally responsible maintainers are the only people who > work on the Postgres cluster, the two approaches are basically > equivalent. > > My take is that the default "right thing" is to transfer ownership of > the 'mailman' database to the 'mailman' user, and use "GRANT ALL ON > SCHEMA public TO fred" in the case that you don't want to give "sudo > mailman" to Fred. > > Rationale: I believe there are a number of things that the 'postgres' > user can do that other users cannot, and you probably don't want > random contractors or new volunteers to have those privileges. On the > principlee that 'postgres' should only do those things that only > 'postgres' can do, you want to make the 'mailman' user the owner of > the 'mailman' database (and 'mailmanweb' too if you go that route). > Then if you have a user 'fred' who may be working on both mailman and > non-mailman databases in a session, then instead of giving sudo > mailman to Fred, 'mailman' can grant all on schema public in mailman > to 'fred'. > > It's a really fine difference, and probably will matter to almost > nobody running Mailman 3. I do think > > user 'mailman' owns the 'mailman' database > > is conceptually simpler than > > user 'postgres owns the 'mailman' database and 'mailman' has ALL > privilege on the PUBLIC schema > > Right? ************************* === From the blog === ...almost any privilege escalation attack on a PostgreSQL database requires the attacker to create malicious objects. ... The public schema is the perfect vector for such a privilege escalation attack. ... In version 15, only the database owner can create objects in the public schema. === The user mailman has its plain text password written into the mailman.cfg file. If that is a potential weakness, would making mailman NOT the owner reduce vulnerability by a degree (in that objects could not be created in the public schema by using mailman's credentials)? Of course I would have a whole world of other problems if those credentials were misused, so I guess it's a bit theoretical anyhow.

2 years, 9 months

moving list from mm3 -> mm3

by Jens Günther

Hey there, I'm still trying to figure out, how to move a bunch of lists from one mm3-instance to another. If somebody has a working solution, I would be really glad to hear from it. I came across this thread, but I don't think it tackles my question: https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/thread/… (or maybe I missed the right parts) We have equal setups and versions: - maxxking docker install 0.4.5 - Core 3.3.8 - API 3.1 - Postorius 1.3.8 ## Config So I found the possibility to get the config of a list via REST-API: curl -u restadmin:restpass localhost:8001/3.1/lists/$short.$domain/config | jq > short.domain This is a nice collection of the configuration of a certain list. Does anybody know how I would get this data back to the newly created list in the second working mm3-instance? Shouldn't it be possible via POST command? I thought of something like: curl -u restadmin:restpass -d @short.domain -H "Content-Type: application/json" localhost:8001/3.1/lists/&short.&domain/config But it returns {"title": "405 Method Not Allowed"} and I don't know where to look in the docs, since it shows almost always a way through mailman shell. Here I found something about POST: https://docs.mailman3.org/projects/mailman/en/latest/src/mailman/rest/docs/… -> but how would it work exactly? ## Members, moderators, owners To export all members I normally run within mm-core-container as user mailman the following command: mailman members &short.&domain > &short.txt To fill them back in, it can be done in Postorius (or is there a way through API?). What I would love to know is how to get out Owners of the corresponding lists and reimport them in the new one (which will be the same at the end :-D but different instance). ## registered users This part is somehow tricky, since I have no clue how to do it. Some of the mailinglist-admins don't want to bother their list-owners again with registering newly on the other system. Is there a way to export all users (I think I found them in the DB in the table auth_users, somehow in combination with account_emailaddress) and get them over to the new instance (actually I just need part of them, but that's another question that I might solve lateron on my own). Maybe the answer is already here: https://docs.mailman3.org/projects/mailman/en/latest/src/mailman/rest/docs/… -> but can somebody help to get this working (import/export)? Thank you in advance, I hope it's not too much or too nooby :-) Jens.

2 years, 10 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/

6 years, 3 months

120 gmail users removed from lists !

by Stephen J. Turnbull

elemac(a)free.fr writes: > Hello, on 15th October, 120 users with gmail address where suddenly > removed from lists in mailman3, something changed in google ? Google is evil, who knew? Google decided to publish a DMARC policy of "p=none". This announces to the world that you have to decide for yourself whether to accept mail from Gmail with a broken DKIM signature from gmail.com. Gmail has decided that they will not accept such email from themselves, even though they know more about the sender than anyone else, and even have access to the original sender copy. Mark has a patch that applies your preferred DMARC mitigation to Gmail authors unconditionally. I think it's in the new version just released 3.3.9, so you can upgrade. The name of the variable is dmarc_addresses, and in Postorius it will be in the same settings group as other DMARC settings, with a similar tag. If for some reason you strongly prefer not to upgrade immediately but want this feature, it's commit #8532f751b6b8bfee3210c1327d755756f99d99ac (you can shorten that to 8532f). I do not recommend this. It probably is independent of other changes in 3.3.9 from other releases. But if not you could have issues. I think you also need the patches in Postorius, but I don't think they've been released yet. "Coming soon" as they say. The relevant commit is #770add1ebf27fd335c675607f26bb8f7cf313ddd, If you search back in the archives, I think Mark posted a link to his original patches. Steve

3 years

Re: Mailmanweb RAM Usage

by Odhiambo Washington

On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 5:10 PM Stephen J. Turnbull <steve(a)turnbull.jp> wrote: > Odhiambo Washington via Mailman-users writes: > > > Using the uwsgi.ini from the virtualenv method documentation, > > mailmanweb is constantly using 2GB RAM on my server. > > Do you mean only HyperKitty + Postorius? That seems like a lot. My > experience is that even on an insanely heavily loaded server (20k+ > lists) the whole suite uses about 2.0G. Since on that server, Mailman > core was forking 22 processes at ~83MB each (very little shared, not > sure the technical reason for that, maybe the Python heap just can't > be shared?), core was taking up about 1.8G. HyperKitty and Postorius > took a little more (I don't recall exactly, maybe 250MB?) > Yes, just Hyperkitty+Postorius: Please see https://imgur.com/a/LPAY69N It represents what I see daily when I run btop.It's always around 2GB, but rarely do I see above. I only have 1 major active mailing list on this server. There are other inactive ones. The main ML has been active since 2005. I migrated it to MM3 from MM2.1.39. > My more standard setup (that one had like 2 IN queue slices and 8 OUT > queue slices) I ran Mailman suite + PostgreSQL (dedicated to Mailman) > + Postfix + nginx (also mostly dedicated to Mailman) + Cyrus IMAPd in > a nominal 2GB Digital Ocean droplet. It didn't run "comfortably", > adding any serious load that chewed up 100s of MB RAM would get things > OOM-killed, but 2GB total (including kernel and all) was barely enough > for that system in normal situations. > > > My database (MariaDB) size is 2GB. > > Do you mean in memory or on disk? Either way that should have ~0 > effect on the size of the Mailman core and web processes. > My MM3 database size on disk. > > Is this expected? > > Depends on if you mean exactly what you said ("mailmanweb"). If so, > no, I would expect mailmanweb (only) to run in 500MB easily and > probably be OK in 250MB. If you mean "when I start Mailman and > mailmanweb, memory usage jumps by about 2GB", then yes, that's what > I'd expect. > In my case, the ~2GB RAM consumption by the uwsgi process is a constant. -- 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]

1 year

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)

7 years, 10 months

Mailman-users search results for query "Postorius"