Search results for "Postorius" - Mailman-users

Re: "Private archives" aren't private

by Simon Liebold

Am 04.06.2017 um 15:55 schrieb Simon Hanna: > > Where are you seeing this behaviour? In my test archive: https://lists.simonliebold.de/hyperkitty/list/simsimmer@lists.simonliebold.… > > What version of Hyperkitty are you using? Master, commit 4c5eaead. > > Can you check what is stored in the database of Hyperkitty? > > ``` > > python manage.py shell > > from hyperkitty.models.mailinglist import MailingList > > MailingList.objects.all().values_list('name', 'archive_policy') > > ``` > > If the value for your list is 1 then we have a problem. 2 is for public > archives and 0 should never be archived. OK, no problem there: <QuerySet [(u'simsimmer(a)lists.simonliebold.de', 2L)]> > > It's possible that you changed the archive_policy of a list and the > change wasn't reflected in Hyperkitty. Postorius is showing the list's settings as "Private archives" (see screenshot). But apparently this setting doesn't do anything when switching it to "public" and back to "private". It always returns '2L'. Don't know if this is expected. Postorius is on 52c9c3a5. > > For such a possibly sensitive issue, you should open a hidden issue in > Gitlab ;-) > The issue is probably my setup. Simon

9 years, 5 months

Re: missing graphics in Postorius

by Mark Sapiro

On 12/7/21 4:01 PM, David Newman wrote: > On 12/7/21 11:17 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: >> Add '127.0.0.1' to ALLOWED_HOSTS anyway. > > Done, thanks. > > Given that DNS works fine on this host, with localhost and 127.0.0.1 > resolving backward and forward, this seems like a bug. Shouldn't the > resolver be able to recognize localhost without hard-coding an address? It's probably a bug, but if so, it's a Django bug and not anything Mailman can do anything about. ... >> Assuming you have >> ``` >> STATIC_ROOT = '/opt/mailman/web/static' >> ``` >> in your /etc/mailman3/settings.py file, you may need to create that >> directory if it doesn't exist. You shouldn't need to manually create >> the /opt/mailman/web/static/postorius directory if the >> /opt/mailman/web/static directory exists and is writable/searchable by >> the Mailman user. > > Yes, that was it. Thanks. > > Previously you'd pointed out what you considered an error in the venv > docs, with the workaround to manually create the /opt/mailman/web > directory [1]. I think the same issue applies here, and also that > /opt/mailman/web and subdirectories need to be owned by the mailman user. I don't recall what I said about that but near the end of the Initial Configuration section at https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/install/virtualenv.html#initial-configu… it says ``` Make sure that the logging path is created. You can run mkdir -p /opt/mailman/web/logs to create the path. ``` I added ``` Also make sure the ``STATIC_ROOT`` directory is created. ``` after that. As far as things being owned by the mailman user, early in the doc at https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/install/virtualenv.html#virtualenv-setup there is a note that says ``` Make sure that you are running commands as mailman user from here forth. Setup Mailman user. ``` -- 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: which mailman3 containers to use?

by Thing

Hi, I am or was actually in the process of rootless podman'ing these and trivy showed a lot of obsolete packages so I planed to roll these in. However I now I see django is out of support. :( Is mailman3 going to be updated to > 5.2? 6? I am not deploying this as is. regards Steven On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 at 05:01, jesper.holck--- via Mailman-users < mailman-users(a)mailman3.org> wrote: > I tried to ask Claude what it will take to update Mailman 3 for Docker ( > https://github.com/maxking/docker-mailman/releases/tag/v0.5.2) to the > newest versions of the included programs and libraries. Here is Claude's > answer: > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > The short answer: much less than you might expect for Mailman itself, > because there’s nothing newer to upgrade to. The real work is in the base > OS and Django, and the Django part is blocked upstream. > > The Mailman suite is already current. v0.5.2 (October 2024) pins mailman > 3.3.10, mailman-hyperkitty 1.2.1, mailmanclient 3.3.5, postorius 1.3.13, > hyperkitty 1.3.12 and django-mailman3 1.3.15. I checked PyPI today and > those are still the newest releases of every one of them. The only > exception is the separate Postorius-only image, which still installs > postorius 1.3.10; bumping that to 1.3.13 is a one-line change. > > Django is the real problem. Postorius, HyperKitty and django-mailman3 all > require Django 4.2 or newer but below 5.1, and the web Dockerfile caps it > further with Django<4.3. That leaves you on 4.2 LTS. Django 4.2’s security > support ended in April 2026 and 5.0 is also end-of-life, so every Django > version the suite accepts is now unsupported. You can’t fix this from the > Docker side: forcing Django 5.2 LTS or 6.x past the pins means patching the > three Django apps yourself and testing them. Until upstream Mailman ships > releases that support newer Django, the practical choice is to stay on > 4.2.x and keep the instance behind a reverse proxy. > > Alpine base images are the main thing that’s actually upgradeable. v0.5.2 > uses Alpine 3.20. The repo’s main branch (last touched June 2026) has moved > core and web to Alpine 3.23.4 and the Postorius image to 3.21.3, but that > hasn’t been tagged as a release. Alpine 3.24 is also out, with point > releases up to 3.24.2 carrying OpenSSL fixes. The catch is that each new > Alpine brings a newer Python, which is what tends to break builds. For > example, Mailman needs the nntplib backport on Python 3.13+, and some > compiled packages fail on musl. > > Other things to change, all already on main: > > * uwsgi is pinned to 2.0.25 because newer builds don’t compile on aarch64. > PyPI has 2.0.31; you can try it if you’re on x86-64 only. > * SMTP_USE_TLS and SMTP_USE_SSL now parse correctly. In v0.5.2, any > non-empty value, including "false", turned TLS on. > * urls.py adds /mailman3/ and /archives/ URL aliases. > * docker-compose gets a Postgres healthcheck, so the other services wait > until the database is ready. > * The bundled compose file still uses postgres:12-alpine, which is long > out of support. Moving to a current Postgres means a dump and restore (or > pg_upgrade), not just changing the tag. > > What it would take in practice: > > * Build from main, or cherry-pick the changes above onto v0.5.2. > * Try Alpine 3.24 and fix whatever Python or musl build failures come up. > * Stay on Django 4.2.x, or take on patching the Mailman Django apps > yourself. > * Upgrade Postgres separately, with a backup first. > * Run tests/test.sh and smoke-test a list end to end: post, archive, > moderation and login. > > Expect an afternoon for steps 1–2 and 4, plus testing. Step 3 is a real > porting project unless upstream releases new versions first. > > Sources: > > * docker-mailman v0.5.2 and its main branch (I inspected the repo directly) > * Alpine 3.24.1 released > * Alpine 3.24.2 OpenSSL security updates > _______________________________________________ > 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 thing.thing(a)gmail.com >

3 weeks, 1 day

Re: Held messages: Long time waiating for response of the Mailman API

by Stephen J. Turnbull

Thanks for your patience with our team; I had already received your second "ping" and Mark's response, but due to the way my MUA presents my INBOX I didn't see it (aside to self: *don't* answer Mailman traffic from the inbox, use the "Mailman 3 virtual folder" view! :-). I would have written very differently if I had seen it.... Stephan Krinetzki writes: > Then we should maybe move to gunicorn, if this is the better way > (or at least better supported way) That's definitely a possibility. Among other things, gunicorn is a Python application, so all the Mailman devs have some hope of debugging it or at least localizing it. That's not true of uwsgi. The other possibility if you don't need high performance is to use the Apache mod_wsgi plugin which seems to be quite stable (that's what I do out of laziness -- I really should have uwsgi and gunicorn setups for testing -- my own throughput and admin needs are very modest). > After we enabled the "slow query log", we got in the postgresql > database the following output: > > 2022-01-25 12:49:41.538 CET [16126] LOG: unexpected EOF on > client connection with an open transaction Ouch. That is a database problem but I don't think it's a problem with the database. There are two database connections involved, one is Mailman core, the other is Django, but this > > > the message is delivered to the list immediately, says that core has finished at least some of its business. I guess it's possible that core drops the transaction on the floor, but that seems weird because I don't think this is a common problem. I'm not going to guess further, maybe Mark or Abhilash has something. ISTR other delay issues that have to do with very large databases. Do you have huge numbers of users, lists, or subscriptions to particular lists? Of course it could be Postorius/Django, but I think Postorius delegates all the logic and database work to core for this. Django's databases are user- and authentication-oriented, I don't recall any list-management logic in it that would induce this: > 2022-01-25 15:34:36.047 CET [16864] LOG: duration: 30760.028 > ms statement: DELETE FROM pendedkeyvalue WHERE > pendedkeyvalue.id = XXX Next log: > ERROR 2022-01-25 18:55:55,037 2599 django.request Service Unavailable: > /postorius/lists/games.lists.rwth-aachen.de/held_messages > ERROR 2022-01-25 18:58:24,325 2588 postorius Mailman REST API > not available Not sure about this. It could indicate a deadlock where each of core and the backend database is waiting for the other, so core isn't able to respond to Postorius. It looks to me like the rest of the traceback is a natural consequence of unavailability of the REST API. > * The venv is in /opt/mailman/mailman-venv > * The settings are in /opt/mailman/mailman-venv/mailman-suite/mailman-suite_project I don't see much to flag here. I don't recall whether allauth.socialaccount is supposed to be enabled or disabled if you have no allauth.socialaccount.providers enabled, but it's probably OK (and I don't see how it could be related to this problem): > contenten of settings.py > # Application definition > > INSTALLED_APPS = ( [...] > 'allauth', > 'allauth.account', > 'allauth.socialaccount', Database looks fine: > # Database > # https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/ref/settings/#databases > > DATABASES = { > #'default': { > # Example for PostgreSQL (recommanded for production): > 'default': { > 'ENGINE': 'django.db.backends.postgresql_psycopg2', > 'NAME': 'mailman', > 'USER': 'mailman', > 'PASSWORD': '<PASS>', > 'HOST': 'localhost', > } > } This shouldn't have anything to do with slow Postorius (full-text search is relevant only to archives, ie, HyperKitty), but Whoosh is known to be slower than Xapian: > # > # Full-text search engine > # > HAYSTACK_CONNECTIONS = { > 'default': { > 'ENGINE': 'haystack.backends.whoosh_backend.WhooshEngine', > 'PATH': os.path.join(BASE_DIR, "fulltext_index"), > # You can also use the Xapian engine, it's faster and more accurate, > # but requires another library. > # http://django-haystack.readthedocs.io/en/v2.4.1/installing_search_engines.h… > # Example configuration for Xapian: > #'ENGINE': 'xapian_backend.XapianEngine' > }, > } > Nope, the virtual machine is dedicated to Mailman3. Mailman3 as > venv, uwsgi as Webservice, Apache as Webserver, Postfix as > Mailserver and PostgreSQL 10 als Database, all on the same host Oh, well, I guess the case against Mailman gets a little stronger.... > At moment i think its a slow database. Because of the slow > database, the Mailman API is slow and so on. We are trying now to > solve the database part with postgresqltuner - maybe we will see > more details then. OK, keep us posted. I will say that it looks from the logs discussed above that PostgreSQL is waiting for Mailman, not vice versa (but that doesn't rule out a deadlock where both are waiting for the other). I hope my message trims things down enough that it rings a bell for somebody. Steve

4 years, 9 months

Re: Messages disappearing into hole??

by Mark Sapiro

On 8/30/20 6:15 AM, Ruth Ivimey-Cook wrote: > > I looked around the interface and decided to set up the sender as a > non-member, as that appeared to permit them to be "special" and outside > of the normal access rules for the list. Before I did that I could send > a message from this sender and that would be sent to me as list owner > for moderation, so both incoming (from my mailserver) and outgoing (to > it) can be completed. > > However, with a non-member who is auto-accepted the message is passed > from my mailserver to mailman and then disappears. I cannot find > anything in the logs to indicate what happened next. I have tried > setting the default non-member policy to both 'hold' and 'default' with > no change in that behaviour. The logs for the mailserver show the > message being sent to mailman; mailman's "smtp.log" shows an LMTP > message being received ok, and then nothing. > > Any ideas how to find out what is going on? I can share config if that > helps but not sure what would be useful. First, this is a bad way to configure an announce list because anyone can post by spoofing the authorized posting address. The better way is to set a list moderator password and post using an Approved: <password> header or pseudo header. See <https://docs.mailman3.org/projects/mailman/en/latest/src/mailman/rules/docs…> for details. As far as the disappearing message is concerned, it's hard to say. What is the non-member's moderation action? Unless it is 'list default' setting the list's default non-member policy has no effect. Also, if the non-member's address or a pattern matching it is in accept_these_nonmembers, that takes precedence over whatever the non-member's moderation action is. One guess about the disappearing message is content filtering may be removing all the message. What is the setting for Filter Action? > As a side-issue, at one point I added a regex matching the sender > address to the acceptable members list, but find that I cannot now > delete it (using postorius): If I delete the field and Save, it returns > on page refresh. There is an issue with Postorius. You can't empty these settings. If you clear the box or or have it contain only whitespace, Postorius won't change the prior setting. In order to remove the only entry in Postorius, you have to replace it with a bogus entry or you can remove it with `mailman shell`. I've just filed <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/-/issues/444> for this. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

6 years, 2 months

Confirmation emails aren't sent to users.

by Stephen J. Turnbull

Ibiam Chihurumnaya via Mailman-users writes: > Confirmation emails aren't being sent to users and there's nothing > in the logs that make it obvious what's happening. As I explained earlier, this backtrace > 233830 File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/hyperkitty/lib/view_helpers.py", line 137, in inner [...] > 233908 File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/mistune/core.py", line 214, in parse_method > 233909 assert lastgroup > 233910 AssertionError is a known issue with mistune, which used by HyperKitty to display messages from the archives. Whatever is happening with the confirmation messages, it's unrelated to this. - What confirmation messages are missing? Mailman may ask for confirmation if a user adds an email address via Postorius, if the user asks for a password reset from Postorius, if a user who is not logged in subscribes to a list (either by email or by Postorius), and there may be other cases. Please describe all that apply. - What makes you think that they are missing? Sometimes users or sites have filters that throw them away, or they may be swallowed by MTAs because of misconfigurations. - Is your "virgin" runner and "out" runner running? (Usually "ps aux | grep mailman" will list only the processes running under mailman. The full command at the end of the line will tell you the names of the runners each process is handling.) - Are there messages collecting in the "virgin" or "out" queues? - Are there messages collecting in the MTA queue (the mailq utility will usually tell you about those)? - Normally you would see log messages for outgoing confirmations in /opt/mailman/mm/var/logs/smtp.log. You might see errors in mailman.log if Mailman core is requesting the confirmations. If Postorius is requesting the confirmations, I think it would probably be in mailmanweb.log (Django has its own mail-sending facility, those don't go through Mailman core). -- GNU Mailman consultant (installation, migration, customization) Sirius Open Source https://www.siriusopensource.com/ Software systems consulting in Europe, North America, and Japan

9 months

Re: Verification Failed Error

by Odhiambo Washington

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. > > > > > Hi Brian, In postorius(a)host.name.com, please change the host.name.com to match the MM3_DOMAINS or whatever it is called in your MACROS. Remember, it has to be a VALID hostname that you will be using for Mailman3 lists. That, coupled with the IPs 172.19.199.x being in relay_from_hosts should let the address to pass verification with Exim. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254 7 3200 0004/+254 7 2274 3223 "Oh, the cruft.", grep ^[^#] :-)

7 years, 10 months

Re: list of subscribers

by Simon Hanna

On 02/04/2018 01:45 PM, Peter Münster wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02 2018, Mark Sapiro wrote: > >>> Yes, the question is rather: where can *normal* members (or moderators) >>> can see the subscriber list? >> Currently, they can't. If you think they should be able to, you can file >> an issue at <https://gitlab.com/mailman/postorius/issues/new>. > Thanks. Done. > > It seems, that even the owner of the list cannot get the full names of > the subscribers, only the email addresses. Is there any other > possibility for the owner (or the site admin) to get the subscriber list > with full names (perhaps with some Python scripting)? You should be able to use mailmanclient to get a list of subscribers with names. Names are optional though, if people signup without them you won't be able to get them. Currently there is no option to require names. I'll open an issue in postorius about showing the name in the member list if there is one associated. IIRC one person(postorius account) can also signup at different lists using different names (regardless of address). There was some discussion about names and potentially using the from header to populate the database but I don't remember the result...

8 years, 9 months

Re: Digest Formatting

by Stephen J. Turnbull

mailman(a)manygoodideas.com writes: > 1) Is there a way to trigger a digest for a user (for testing > purposes)? Specifically, is there a function that can be > revealed via the REST api to an interface like Postorius and > Affinity? You can't trigger a digest to an individual member (unless they're the only active digest subscriber to the list, of course, so you can experiment on a test list if it's not specific to a particular list). I thought there was a way to trigger immediate distribution of a digest immediately, but I guess I'm remembering that from Mailman 2. Neither the Postorius management interface nor the core documentation suggests there's such a trigger in Mailman 3. > > 2) I have customized list:member:digest:header, but am not seeing > the custom text where I thought it should be. The documentation > seems to imply that both list:member:digest:header and > list:member:digest:footer surround each message in the digest Which documentation do you mean? As far as I know (Mark will have authoritative information if I'm wrong), the digest header and footer appear at the top and bottom of the *whole* digest message (ie, once each per digest), not surrounding or in the bodies of the component messages.

6 years

Re: Database running VERY hot

by Darren Smith

Abhilash, Thanks for the response. I'm going over to lists.fedoraproject.org to see if they have done any fine tuning. Our installation is at https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com, if you're interested in seeing an installation with over 32,000 mailing lists. As I mentioned, it was big enough that we have disabled the browse experience in Postorius and are hosting our own pages for browsing to a new list. If we get time to work on this we will certainly create a pull request. :) On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Abhilash Raj <maxking(a)asynchronous.in> wrote: > Hi Darren, > > > On 3/8/18 9:43 AM, Darren Smith wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> We had an old installation of Mailman 2.1 across three servers with over >> 32,000 mailing lists on them. Due to circumstances beyond my control, we >> had to shut them down and quickly set up Mailman 3 on a new server. >> >> We have Mailman3 set up on a single server this time, as we were having >> problems with a 3-server setup and Hyperkitty and archives. Long story >> short, it is up and running, and our users are starting to come back. >> >> However, we do not have very many users hitting Postorius and Hyperkitty >> yet, and we are seeing a distressing number of 504 gateway timeouts. >> >> We noticed that there is a significant number of queries to the API >> whenever hitting Postorius's front page to load the mailing lists, and >> then >> on every load. It looks as if it makes a single call to the API to get >> information about a single list, and does this 10 times - once for each >> list - to render the page. This gets much worse when users set the view to >> 200 per page, as they are inclined to do with 32,000 mailing lists... >> >> What we've done, actually, is to override the front page and point the >> users to a different set of static pages where we have all of our lists >> categorized and searchable, and when they find the list they are looking >> for, we have a link back to postorius. It has taken a lot of the stress >> off >> of the server. >> >> However, I still see where the database at times can run VERY hot. >> >> We have set up this server to run with PostgreSQL. When I do a ps aux | >> grep postgres, I find a lot of processes that have been spawned to take >> care of mailman - a dozen or so. However, one of the threads is taking up >> about 85% of the load, another thread about 14%, and little dribbles here >> and there from the rest of the threads. >> >> Here are the questions: >> >> 1) Has anyone run into problems like these? I would think that maybe this >> is an issue having so many mailing lists, but honestly there aren't that >> many people using the system yet. It is going to ramp up as the users >> realize that we are live again, but we aren't getting that much traffic. >> > > I can say that in general, Postorius doesn't really optimize REST API > queries and so loading a single page can sometimes make things bad. > > Currently, the largest installation of Mailman 3 that we know of runs at > lists.fedoraproejct.org and the administrators of the list would know how > well does our Web UI scale. > > However, I don't think we have anyone actively working on trying to fix > this particular issue. Pull Requests and fixes are welcome :) > > >> 2) Is there any configuration that I can set, especially with regards to >> the database, so that it can be used more efficiently and not throttle >> through one or two threads? >> > > There isn't any configuration that would change how databases are used in > Mailman Core. Django *may* have some, but I don't know about any of them of > the top of my head. > > thanks, > Abhilash >

8 years, 8 months

Mailman-users search results for query "Postorius"