Search results for "sapiro" - lists.mailman3.org

[MM3-users] Re: Emergency moderation and clearing out a lot of held messages

by Mark Sapiro

On 11/11/22 10:23, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > The two database configuration is not really a recommendation. I > suppose the practice derives from an abundance of caution, as there > are concepts like "User" that must be implemented in somewhat > different ways across components (core doesn't authenticate users, > while Postorius's primary function is authentication of users). I > myself would worry that there might be name collisions among tables, > which would cause mayhem, but that's probably excessive. FWIW, the Mailman3 installations at both mail.python.org and lists.mailman3.org use a single database and with the exception of Mailman core's tables and Postorius' `template` table, tables are prefixed with application names like `auth`, `django_` and `hyperkitty_`. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

2 years, 6 months

[MM3-users] Re: WSGI: gunicorn and uwsgi

by Mark Sapiro

On 6/9/19 3:18 AM, andrew.bernard(a)gmail.com wrote: > Using the Ubuntu 19 packages for all the mailman suite, uwsgi is the Python WSGI server included. I have now switched over to a full build from current source from gitlab, following Mark Sapiro's excellent instructions. Thank you. > It would appear that the current code has the use of gunicorn built in. Is gunicorn the preferred way now to run the mailman Django apps? Is it worth spending time converting everything to use uwsgi, or should I go with the flow and use gunicorn? The "built-in" gunicorn is used only by core to provide the REST API interface. This replaced the former standard library wsgiref module to improve performance. It is completely independent of whatever WSGI server you use for Django. > What are the advantages of gunicorn over uwsgi? I can't comment intelligently on that. For a long time I used Graham Dumpleton's mod_wsgi with Apache for wsgi support, mostly for MoinMoin. I have no experience with uwsgi. When I set up MM 3 on lists.mailman3.org, the server was already using nginx so I arbitrarily chose gunicorn for that. On mail.python.org I started using mod_wsgi, but at one point there was an issue due apparently to an SSL library mismatch following an upgrade, but before the cause was recognized, I switched to gunicorn to get things up. On a third server I manage, I use mod_wsgi for MoinMoin which is Python 2.7. I found setting up both Python 2.7 and Python 3 versions of mod_wsgi on the same server to be daunting, so I went with gunicorn for Mailman 3 on that server too. My choices of gunicorn over uwsgi were an initial arbitrary choice followed by familiarity for subsequent choices. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

5 years, 11 months

[MM3-users] Re: where to configure max_days_to_hold on MM3 GUI interface?

by Mark Sapiro

On 2/5/20 9:55 AM, Shashikanth Komandoor wrote: > > With the above script I am able to set the value of max_days_to_hold as > required but how to check manually and make my held messages discarded > automatically which are after the specified period configured for > max_days_to_hold. > > If I am able to do it manually I can be confident to take in to production > so that the held messages after a specific period would not be appeared > under "held messages" tab. I'm really not sure what you are looking to do, but I can tell you that while the max_days_to_hold list attribute exists and can be set, the actual discarding of held messages older than max_days_to_hold is not implemented. Thus the setting currently does nothing. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

5 years, 3 months

[MM3-users] Re: New messages not being archived

by Mark Sapiro

On 7/15/21 11:28 AM, Sarah H wrote: > I have, it just ends up printing out the pages html in the error message after: > > </html> > Jul 14 10:52:31 2021 (471314) Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib64/python3.6/site-packages/mailman_hyperkitty/__init__.py", line 154, in _archive_message > url = self._send_message(mlist, msg) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib64/python3.6/site-packages/mailman_hyperkitty/__init__.py", line 210, in _send_message > raise ValueError(result.text) > ValueError: > ... I'm interested in what's before that in the log. I.e., the message that says HyperKitty failure on <the url>: <the returned data> (<the http status>) Or, is there some redirect in your web server that is maybe redirecting `http` to `https` and returning some `3xx` status? We really need to see the status from the above message. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years, 9 months

[MM3-users] Re: slow restart time for mailmanweb

by Mark Sapiro

On 12/28/21 1:07 PM, David Newman wrote: > Debian 11.2, Mailman 3.3.5, Python 3.9.2, MariaDB 10.5.12-0+deb11u1 > > On a Debian system running MariaDB, mailman3 restarts quickly but > mailmanweb takes about 90 seconds: > > root@myhost # time systemctl restart mailmanweb > > real 1m30.156s > user 0m0.013s > sys 0m0.000s > > The daemon.log has a timeout error: > > Dec 28 12:16:01 myhost systemd[1]: Stopping GNU Mailman Web UI... > Dec 28 12:16:03 myhost uwsgi[409333]: [uWSGI] getting INI configuration > from /etc/mailman3/uwsgi.ini > Dec 28 12:17:31 myhost systemd[1]: mailmanweb.service: State > 'stop-sigterm' timed out. Killing. ... > Dec 28 12:17:31 myhost systemd[1]: Stopped GNU Mailman Web UI. It looks to me like the timeout is in stopping, not starting. What happens if you separately systemctl stop mailmanweb and systemctl start mailmanweb -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years, 4 months

[MM3-users] Re: FILTER_VHOST = True doesn't work fine with alias_domain

by Mark Sapiro

On 2/18/22 01:55, Élodie BOSSIER via Mailman-users wrote: > Thank you for your response Mark, > > With Mailman 2.1, the lists were split on their webpage respectively. > How could I do same with Mailman 3.3.3 (Tom Sawyer) please ? > > My domain table SQL have this result : > id, mail_host, description, alias_domain > 1, ml.franceserv.fr, NULL, local.ml.franceserv.fr > 2, ml.viticreation.fr, NULL, local.ml.viticreation.fr If you go to https://example.com/mailman3/domains/ (the Domains view in Postorius) you will see at least two entries, one with Mail Host ml.franceserv.fr and one with Mail Host ml.viticreation.fr. What are the Web Host entries for these? You should have two separate site entries in the django_site table (https://example.com/admin/sites/site/) for these domains. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years, 2 months

[MM3-users] Re: Huge performance issue: Mailman doesn't (seem to) receive any mails.

by Mark Sapiro

On 9/18/19 3:32 AM, Henrik Rasmussen wrote: > I am running maxking/mailman-*:0.2 (GNU Mailman 3.2.0 (La Villa Strangiato)). > > It looks like Mailman is not receiving (enough) mails, but are keps in the Postfix queue and I can't figure out why. > > I get a lot of "mail for [172.19.199.2]:8024 is using up 7841 of 7841 active queue entries" in the postfix container log (more postfix log at the buttom. I know nothing about Docker containers and how they communicate with each other, but Postfix is trying to deliver mail via lmtp to [172.19.199.2]:8024. Mailman's lmtp runner should be running and listening on port 8024. Either that is not the case or that port is not exposed to Postfix on IP 172.19.199.2. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

5 years, 7 months

[MM3-users] Re: MM3 gateway errors and frequent reboot needs

by Mark Sapiro

On 4/19/20 1:21 PM, hansen(a)rc.org wrote: > We have had to reboot the list server almost every week and wonder if there is something leaking and eating up resources. I does not appear to be memory, though. The server is slow to respond (could be because it's overseas) and then after some time we get intermittent gateway errors and finally we cannot access the lists online because of the gateway errors. It appears to me that the issue is with Postorius, but I could be wrong. Do files get closed after opening? Are we alone having such issues? We are not seeing an issue like this on either lists.mailman3.org (this list) or mail.python.org (at the moment 118 @python.org Mailman 3 lists) What are you seeing in web server logs? -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

5 years

[MM3-users] Re: pending subscriptions lost?

by Mark Sapiro

On 3/14/22 09:18, IEM Network Operation Center (IOhannes m zmölnig) wrote: > > this is with "Postorius Version 1.2.4" (as installed by the mailman3 > Debian package). The Debian packages are OK for people who want to install things via a package manager, but they are quite out of date. Something like the following in `mailman shell` can do it. ``` >>> # Cutoff date delete pended subscriptions older than this >>> cutoff = '2022-03-01' >>> pendings = getUtility(IPendings) >>> # Prior to Mailman core 3.3.5 need to explicitly delete workflow >>> wfm = getUtility(IWorkflowStateManager) >>>for token, data in pendings.find(pend_type='subscription'): ... if data['token_owner'] != 'subscriber': ... continue ... if data['when'] >= cutoff: ... continue ... pendings.confirm(token, expunge=True) ... # for MM < 3.3.5 ... wfm.discard(token) ... >>> commit() ``` -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years, 2 months

[MM3-users] Re: How to hide sender completely

by Mark Sapiro

On 5/9/23 02:00, Roland Miyamoto via Mailman-users wrote: > Could anyone tell me whether there is a way to hide > the sender address of list mails completely from the recipients. > > Even for an anonymous list, the sender still occurs in two fields > > envelope-from <sender(a)sender-domain.tld> > X-MailFrom: sender(a)sender-domain.tld > > of the mail header. > Is there a way to suppress this information? Anonymous lists should be removing any X-MailFrom: or X-Envelope-From: headers from delivered mail. The envelope-from in the outgoing mail should be the list-bounces address, not the original sender. If you are seeing this information in mail from an anonymous list, it is a bug and I would like to see a raw message as received from the list with this information. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

2 years

Search results for query "sapiro"