Search results for "Postorius" - Mailman-users

Re: Mailman, etc. upgrade woes and persistent bugs

by Brian Carpenter

On 2/13/21 10:53 AM, Jim Popovitch via Mailman-users wrote: > But how do you display a "Membership List page" for admins in MM3 > (choice of wording is specific to other emails you've posted today) > without third-party application(s), and isn't that too a shortcoming in > MM3 due to that functionality being present in MM2? Look, without a > doubt the REST API of MM3 Core is cool, but let's be honest, all the 3rd > party wrapping and baggage is, well, not so cool. But, again being > honest, you can't have a MM3 system without all of those things. With > MM2 we have all those things, and we are happy with them.:) Affinity is just a UI that sits on top of Mailman 3 core. Most of its functions and displays come from Mailman 3 core. Everything I mentioned about how Affinity displays List Member Management to List Owners uses MM3's REST api to do so. In my opinion, Postorius is nowhere near in taking advantage of all that Mailman 3 core offers along with free tools such as Bootstrap 4. The only thing that is holding Postorius back is time to improve it and that is not the fault of MM3 or the developers. The thing to take away from this however is Postorius still has the potential (because the foundation is there) to be a great modern UI for Mailman 3 core. MM2 does not have that potential and never will. Sure it works until it doesn't. I am pretty sure Pipermail is a wrapper and not an inherit part of MM2. -- Brian Carpenter Harmonylists.com Emwd.com

4 years, 2 months

Moderation action "None" is misleading

by Stephen J. Turnbull

Markus Grandpré writes: > I find the use of the term 'None' (or 'Kein' in the German > translation; see attachments) This list does not allow attachments. Please be more explicit in your explanations (see comments below), or (preferred, because it's unlikely that action will take place soon, and mailing list conversations are forgotten in a few weeks at most) create an issue (probably at https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/) and attach the files there. > in the 'Moderation action' column of the member list misleading, as > the term suggests that no moderation action is applied to the > respective member. > > However, this is not necessarily the case. If you check a member’s > "Administration options / Moderation" setting, a moderation action, > such as "Moderation" or "List default", may be in effect. I don't understand. My users are pretty innocuous so "List default" and "Default processing" are in fact what is displayed in my installation (Mailman 3.3.10 and Postorius 1.3.13). If I change one subscriber to "Hold", that is what is displayed after refreshing the user list screen. What versions of Mailman and Postorius are you using? If you are using current Mailman, perhap the German translation is inaccurate. > I suggest that the 'Moderation action' column should display the > currently set value of the 'Administration options / Moderation' > setting for each member. See also https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/188 for a related issue in a different context (the user's preferences page). The issue there is wanting the effective setting in cases where a list or user setting is in effect but the user's list of subscriptions shows "----".

2 months, 2 weeks

Re: Moderated unsub requests are not provided by mailman3 service

by Mark Sapiro

On 11/29/24 4:47 PM, Joachim Schrod wrote: > > The unsubscriptions requests are not shown in the web interface. I > suppose they should appear in the UI section "Subscription requests", > either as "Pending Approval" or "Pending Confirmation". (Frankly, I > don't understand the difference between these two options at all.) Subscriptions pending confirmation are those waiting for the user to confirm. Those pending approval are waiting for moderator approval. Unsubscription requests not being shown is https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/332 which was fixed in Postorius 1,3.6 released over 3 years ago. Current release is 1.3.13. > System information: mailman3 3.3.3; Postorius (mailman3-web) 1.3.4; > both on Debian 11 (bullseye). > > I know that this is out of date; thus a definitive info "this is fixed > by now" is quite OK for me. (Debian upgrade is planned as the next > action after getting Mailman3 to work for that use case.) Yes, this is fixed. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

4 months, 3 weeks

Re: MM3 on debian - redirect problem

by Mark Sapiro

On 4/27/20 8:17 AM, Gelpi Andrea wrote: > Hi, > on a debian10 I have mm3 installed via apt-get > > apt-get install mailman3-full > dpkg-reconfigure mailman3 > dpkg-reconfigure mailman3-web > > I have this minor issue > > https://webserver/mailman3 redirects to > http://webserver/mailman/postorius/lists/ > > that doesn't exist. > > The same problem form django admin page to return to lists > > https://website/mailman3/admin/sites/site > > In the upper right corner I have a link to https://webserver/mailman3 > that redirects to https://mailman/postorius/lists/ > > I searched for a redirect but without success. The redirection must be a web server issue. There is a urls.py file probably in the same directory as your django settings - probably /usr/share/mailman3-web/urls.py in your case. You can make a URL like http://webserver/mailman/postorius/lists/ work by adding url(r'^mailman/postorius/', include('postorius.urls')), to the urlpatterns list in the urls.py file. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

4 years, 11 months

Re: Mailman backend maintenance task

by Abhilash Raj

> On Aug 24, 2021, at 8:33 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephenjturnbull(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, Eugenio, > > I wrote this earlier but am in the middle of moving my office so my > mail has been intermittent. I have been following your discussion > with Abhilash, and he's definitely the expert, especially if you are > using the containers he creates and distributes. But there's some > information here he hasn't mentioned yet. > > Please consider the following discussion to be background that allows > you to understand some of the considerations. I've only run the > Mailman 3 suite with all three running constantly on the same host, so > I have no experience with this kind of issue. > > eugenio.jordan(a)esa.int writes: > >> Our customer is currently using PostGRESQL as backend, and we would >> like to perform some maintenance tasks, namely running vacuum full, >> or at least trying to rebuild hyperkitty_email primary key related >> index. We have been asked on the real impact of putting in place >> such initiative. Though the latter is related to archiving, I >> haven't found a way to stop just Hyperkitty or Django related >> processes other than stopping Mailman's core, hence preventing >> mails addressed to distribution lists from being delivered, could >> you please confirm if I am correct? > > Mailman core can certainly run without either Postorius or HyperKitty. > Controlling Mailman core (moderation, helping users) without Postorius > is annoying, but it can be done. If you stop the HyperKitty process, > what should happen, I believe, is that posts for archiving will > accumulate in the 'archive' queue until HyperKitty is available again. > > It's been a while since I studied this so I could be completely wrong, > but as I understand it HyperKitty and Postorius are not daemon > processes. Rather, they are WSGI applications, which means they are > subprocesses spawned by your webserver, and controlled by it. In > order to keep them from running, you would reconfigure the webserver > to not call those WSGI applications. How that is done is specific to > the webserver and the WSGI module. If you are running from Docker > containers, most likely, you can just stop their containers. Yeah, Postorius and Hyperkitty themselves aren’t daemons, but they run inside WSGI servers like uwsgi/gunicorn which are typically separate daemons than webserver like Nginx which sits in the front. However there are common webserver modules like mod_wsgi (for apache2) which will let you run without managing a separate WSGI server. So, it depends on the setup, you can either just stop the WSGI server or stop the web server. For, containers, the WSGI server (uwsgi) runs in the container and you can just stop the mailman-web container. -- thanks, Abhilash Raj (maxking)

3 years, 7 months

Re: Patch/kludge suggestion and a question on adding accepted addresses

by Mark Sapiro

On 04/24/2017 07:07 AM, David Krantz wrote: > On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Barry Warsaw <barry(a)list.org> wrote: >> On Apr 23, 2017, at 10:33 PM, David Krantz wrote: > >>> I have another question: In the old mailman you could add accepted >>> senders without adding them to the list. Is that possible in Mailman >>> 3/Postorius? >> >> You do this by creating a "nonmember" subscription for the sender, and then >> setting that member's moderation_action to Action.accept. > > Okay. I see no way of doing that in my instance of Postorius but in > this case it is okay to do it in the command prompt. Yes. There are still quite a few things that aren't yet exposed in Postorius and probably some not yet exposed in the rest API. In these cases you have to resort to mailman shell (aka mailman withlist). -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

7 years, 11 months

Re: Core, Hyperkitty and Postorius releases

by Mark Sapiro

On 5/13/21 2:27 PM, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 5:00 AM Abhilash Raj <maxking(a)asynchronous.in> wrote: > >> Hey Everyone, >> >> I am pleased to announce new stable releases for Mailman Core, Postorius, >> Hyperkitty. >> >> These include both new features and bug fixes. Complete change log for >> each components: >> >> Mailman Core 3.3.3: >> https://docs.mailman3.org/projects/mailman/en/latest/src/mailman/docs/NEWS.… > > > May I ask if this is a typo? > I am asking because Mailman Core 3.3.4 was announced on Marc 22nd. > So is this new one version 3.3.3 or 3.3.5? The text you are quoting is from the Feb 2 announcement <https://mail.python.org/archives/list/mailman-announce@python.org/message/N…> of the release of Mailman core 3.3.3. Mailman 3.3.4 was released and announced at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/mailman-announce@python.org/message/H… on March 21 and is the current release. There is no "new one". -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years, 11 months

Re: Splitting hosts: mta&core vs postorius

by Stephen J. Turnbull

Ruth Ivimey-Cook writes: > On 6/22/20 6:23 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > By design, Mailman core doesn't need to talk to the Internet or to the > > secure internal network -- Internet functions are delegated to the MTA > > and the webapps, and local configuration is via shell access which in > > principle could be console. > > Sorry, I missed this earlier. I was more or less trying to describe what I thought you were trying to do, and noting that Mailman is designed for it. Thank you for the confirmation. > I am using exim and there is a big benefit when exim can see the > list directory names. Indeed. (I wrote the proof of concept Exim config for Mailman 3 on Debian.) But that's *all* it needs to see. It should be possible to get that information to Exim in some other way, perhaps through a small app that talks to the REST API. If that's generalizable to other MTAs (especially Postfix, but also Sendmail and maybe qmail) it's worth us looking into (and if it's Exim-specific, at this stage I'd say "patches welcome"). This is also the kind of thing that an NFS read-only mount does fine (of course you may not want NFS on a system in the DMZ :-/ ). > However, I find the mailman shell program not very intuitive, and so > would prefer to have the web app for admin purposes. By "local configuration" I mean anything that requires access to the .cfg files or installing code. Anything you can do via Postorius (or soon, via Affinity, hi Brian!) is not local configuration in this sense.

4 years, 9 months

Re: template head/footer questions.

by Mark Sapiro

On 4/8/22 11:04, bob B via Mailman-users wrote: > I migrated from mailman 2 to mailman3 and had head/footer questions. > > In the mailman 3 GUI see the templates section, so where do those files get edited/stored? in the postorius_emailtemplate table in the database. > I added a footer to a list via the GUI, but I do not see it in: > /var/templates/lists/[listNAME]/en Because when you set a template in Postorius it makes an entry in the template table in the database with a URI pointing to its own API to retrieve the template. > I see some directories corresponding to list names in /var/templates/lists/ But I do not have a directory for all my lists and for the footer one I just added. > > Bottom line, > > I assume I should not edit or create any files in /var/templates/lists/ and just use the GUI? That's up to you. The default search path for templates in the absence of a template table entry (or even with one with a mailman:/// URI) includes the var/templates/lists/list_id directory. is this directory leftover from migrating from mailman 2 to 3? No I have a list admin who has made some head and footer files and wants me to put them in /var/templates/lists/[listNAME]/en/.... but I think that may not be the best option. Again, it's up to you. If you have Postorius and want list admins to be able to create, modify, break, etc. templates without involving you, then Postorius is a good option, but it isn't in all cases. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years

Re: Mailman, etc. upgrade woes and persistent bugs

by Mark Sapiro

On 2/11/21 10:22 PM, hansen(a)rc.org wrote: > I just had my Mailman suite upgraded. When it got started, I starting receiving messages that hundreds of subscribers to the lists had been disables, including several of the list moderators. This version started supporting bounce processing, but how in the world was this upgrade allowed to act on bounces that were being collected PRIOR to enabling bounce processing?? I'm sorry about that. It's too late now, but the avoidance is discussed at <https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-users@mailman3.org/thread/…>. > I got many angry emails, messages and phone calls asking what was going on, as they were bona fide list members. I was very surprised myself. > > I then looked at several of the disabled accounts, but the subscription info page in Postorius had no information about whether an account was enabled or disabled. Why is this not displayed???. The members can't see if their account is enabled. Is this another example of the disconnect between Mailman and Postorius? If the user has a Django account, she can see all that info at (e.g. for this list) <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/accounts/subscriptions/> She gets there from `Mailman settings` in the dropdown under her user name. She can also get there via the `Manage Subscription` button on the list's Info page. That takes her to `List-based preferences` for the list. Any setting not selected there is inherited from the Address-based preferences or Global Mailman preferences > Further, even after the upgrade, the moderators still cannot access the list memberships even though all the lists are set to allow that. I would have asked the moderators to do this if this access bug had been fixed, but they can't get there. You've already reported this at <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/462>, and it's been previously reported at <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/369>. > As a result of these bugs, after consulting with Brian, who helped with the upgrade, I spent many hours re-enabling the several hundred accounts that had been disabled. I had to go through each email notification to find the address of a disabled account, then find the list, then the member, in Postorius, and finally enable the account (at which time Postorius DID show the enabled status). I'm sorry you had to go through this. The potential issue and the avoidances should be better documented. Unfortunately, they aren't. > Please, can the next upgrade include these very basic fixes/enhancements, which I requested a long time ago: > > a. The ability of moderators to see the list membership (a bug). As I note above, this is a known issue. We are a small project with very feew core developers, all of whom are volunteers. There is a merge request at <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/merge_requests/423> which purports to fix <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/369>, but as you can see from the comment thread, it is not complete and the author has apparently disappeared. If you would like to take it over and address the deficiencies, we would welcome that. > b. The ability of members to change their addresses for all lists they are subscribed to. Users can add addresses to their account and can then change their subscribed address at (again, e.g. for this list) <https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/accounts/list-options/mailman-users.mai…> (Get there via the `Manage Subscription` button on the list's Info page.) If one is subscribed to lists via their `primary` address, one can go to `E-mail Addresses` in their account settings and make a new address `primary` and that will change all their subscriptions. > and further, now: > > c. That when members go to look at their subscription info, they can actually see the settings. They can if they go to `Mailman settings` in the dropdown or the `Manage Subscription` button on the list's Info page and look at all the tabs. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

4 years, 2 months

Mailman-users search results for query "Postorius"