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

[MM3-users] Re: Confirmation emails aren't sent to users.

by Ibiam Chihurumnaya

Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 2/14/26 01:04, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > mailman-web diffsettings also works. (As far as I know > > mailman-web is effectively an alias for django-admin.) > > Actually, in our recommended virtualenv install mailman-web is preferred > because django-admin doesn't load /etc/mailman3/settings.py by default. > -- > Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, > San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan I mostly use mailman-web for this reason.

6 days, 22 hours

[MM3-users] Re: Can't subscribe on new site/domain

by Mark Sapiro

On 10/10/25 3:46 PM, Flo via Mailman-users wrote: > > I found it, it's in a different directory: > > /var/lib/mailman3/web# sqlite3 mailman3web.db > SQLite version 3.46.1 2024-08-13 09:16:08 > Enter ".help" for usage hints. > sqlite> SELECT * from django_mailman3_maildomain JOIN django_site ON > site_id = django_site.id; > ... > ... > 8|lists.example.com|7|7|Lists of Example|lists.example.com > sqlite> > > The two working domains are first (...) . The problematic domain > (renamed to lists.example.com) appears when I create it in Postorius. > > For me the only conspicuous is that the numbers are 8|.|7|7 while at the > other two entries they are the same for the whole line: 2|.|2|2 and 4|.| > 4|4 . The fields in order are: 1. the id of the django_mailman3_maildomain entry 2. the mail_domain in the django_mailman3_maildomain entry 3. the site_id the django_mailman3_maildomain entry 4. the id of the django-site entry 5. the domain name in the django-site entry 6. the display name in the django-site entry The important things are 2. and 5. which are the mail host and the web host that you see in the Postorius domains view. 3. and 4. are what we joined on so they will always be the same. They aren't related to 1. which is just sequentially assigned when entries are created. 1., 3. and 4. being equal in some cases is a coincidence. The question is what are the other 2 entries. In particular are all 3 values for 2. different and all 3 values for 5. different or are some the same? If 2 of those entries have the same value for 5. and different values for 2., that explains the issue when accessing Postorius at 5. because that web host does not have a unique mail host. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

4 months, 2 weeks

[MM3-users] Re: Installing mailman 3

by Rafael Mora

Ok, I'll install whoosh on env2 Thanks El vie., 21 jul. 2017 a las 16:32, Mark Sapiro (<mark(a)msapiro.net>) escribió: > On 07/21/2017 02:27 PM, Rafael Mora wrote: > > > > it says it needs whoosh > > > > How do I install that? on env2 with python2 or env with python3 ??? > > > In env2 do 'pip install whoosh' > > -- > 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 > https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/ > -- Atentamente / Best Regards Ing. Rafael Mora

8 years, 7 months

[MM3-users] Re: statistics monitoring for Mailman3

by Seth Seeger

> On Mar 12, 2021, at 12:10 AM, Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> wrote: > > On 3/11/21 8:05 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: >> >> The data are in Mailman's smtp.log, but I'm not aware of anyone who's >> written anything to analyze it. It would be fairly easy to do depending >> on exactly what you want. > > > You inspired me. See <https://www.msapiro.net/scripts/smtp_report>. I get the following error: File "./smtp_report", line 44 print(f' {lname}: {tot}') ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax I'm running python3 (3.5.3), and I'm afraid I don't know enough python to know what's wrong. Thanks, Seth

4 years, 11 months

[MM3-users] Re: Attack on Mailman Server?

by Mark Sapiro

On 3/9/23 12:34, Eggert Ehmke via Mailman-users wrote: > In the log file there are several entries like this: > > > ERROR 2023-03-09 13:09:34,066 53357 django.request Internal Server Error: /accounts/ > signup/ > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/core/handlers/exception.py", > line 47, in inner > response = get_response(request) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/core/handlers/base.py", line > 181, 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 > 70, in view > return self.dispatch(request, *args, **kwargs) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/utils/decorators.py", line 43, in > _wrapper > return bound_method(*args, **kwargs) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/allauth/decorators.py", line 18, in > wrap > resp = ratelimit.consume_or_429(request, action=action, **rl_kwargs) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/allauth/ratelimit.py", line 77, in > consume_or_429 > return render(request, "429." + app_settings.TEMPLATE_EXTENSION, status=429) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/shortcuts.py", line 19, in > render > content = loader.render_to_string(template_name, context, request, using=using) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/template/loader.py", line 61, in > render_to_string > template = get_template(template_name, using=using) > File "/opt/mailman/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/django/template/loader.py", line 19, in > get_template > raise TemplateDoesNotExist(template_name, chain=chain) > django.template.exceptions.TemplateDoesNotExist: 429.html > > So what is special about this 429.html? Django allauth is returning a 429 status because it is rate limiting due to too many requests in a short time (a bot accessing the signup page multiple times per second.) Allauth is telling Django to render a status=429 response using a 429.html template and Django can't find one. This would appear to be a django-allauth issue. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

2 years, 11 months

[MM3-users] Re: Phantom Email Address in Nonmember List

by Mark Sapiro

On 9/18/24 09:35, Steve Brown via Mailman-users wrote: > > Yes, that is what is happening, but only for messages from the steve@stevebrown address. I can send a screenshot and a .txt of the headers (of the message after sent back to me from MM3 and long!) but didn't see a way to do that on the archive page. Do I need to post from my gmail address? The usual behavior of most MUAs (mail clients) is to set the envelope sender to the same address as From:. In that case, you won't see an issue like this. In your case, when you send via tmdhosting servers, they set that odd bounce+... address as the envelope sender, presumably so they can do something in processing DSNs returned to that address. If you post the full headers of such a message from the list, either inline or as a .txt attachment, I'll look and say what I can. As far as getting headers from HyperKitty is concerned, if you click on a thread containing the message, there is a Download button which will produce a gzipped mbox containing the message(s) in that thread, but the headers are very minimal - only From:, To:, Subject:, Date:, Message-ID:, MIME-Version: and Content-Type:. There is also a From_ separator, but it contains the From: address, not the true envelope sender. > One clue I hadn't spotted before was a bodyhash_mismatch warning in the headers. No idea where that came from. Doesn't appear in emails from me to other addresses. Is that in Authentication-Results:? It is probably saying an original DKIM signature fails to verify because of a body mismatch which is expected if Mailman has filtered any MIME parts or added a message header or footer. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

1 year, 5 months

[MM3-users] Re: Problem upgrading from 2.1 to 3, dockerized

by Mark Sapiro

On 8/8/25 11:43, jesper.holck--- via Mailman-users wrote: > I recently followed the instructions here https://github.com/g4rf/dockerized-mailcow-mailman, and was able to create a new Mailman 3, Debian-based installation. I then followed the instructions here https://docs.mailman3.org/en/latest/migration.html in order to migrate from my old, Centos-based installation, to the new, Debian-based installation. It seemed to work well, but unfortunately a problem showed up. > > Whenever someone posted to one of the lists on the new installation, the messages were rejected by Postfix: > > postfix-mailcow-1 | Aug 5 20:55:48 ef2b760c2e61 postfix/cleanup[8681]: B7B856099EC: message-id=<A8946B8E-2A47-4701-9548-4544981FAC5E(a)gmail.com> > postfix-mailcow-1 | Aug 5 20:55:49 ef2b760c2e61 postfix/cleanup[8681]: B7B856099EC: milter-reject: END-OF-MESSAGE from unknown[172.22.1.1]: 5.7.1 This message does not meet our delivery requirements; from=<mylist-bounces(a)myserver.dk> to=<mylistuser1(a)gmail.com> proto=ESMTP helo=<[172.19.199.4]> > postfix-mailcow-1 | Aug 5 20:55:50 ef2b760c2e61 postfix/cleanup[8681]: 216D36099EC: message-id=<A8946B8E-2A47-4701-9548-4544981FAC5E(a)gmail.com> > postfix-mailcow-1 | Aug 5 20:55:50 ef2b760c2e61 postfix/cleanup[8681]: 216D36099EC: milter-reject: END-OF-MESSAGE from unknown[172.22.1.1]: 5.7.1 This message does not meet our delivery requirements; from=<mylist-bounces(a)myserver.dk> to=<mylistuser2(a)mail.dk> proto=ESMTP helo=<[172.19.199.4]> The above messages are not messages normally seen from Postfix. They apparently come from some mailcow milter. > So, for each of the existing lists, I had to delete the old list and create a new one - with the same name and the same users. After this, everything seems to work as expected. I can think of nothing that `mailman import21` would do that would be different from creating a list, configuring it and adding members. Since you are following a third party how-to, please see https://wiki.list.org/x/12812344 - perhaps reporting this at https://github.com/g4rf/dockerized-mailcow-mailman/issues would be appropriate. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

6 months, 2 weeks

[MM3-users] Re: Mailman rewrite the Cc header incorrectly

by Mark Sapiro

On 5/26/20 9:10 PM, Alan So wrote: > Thanks again for the work and just notice that the issue has been closed already. Looks like unfolding the header line is a logical way but it seems that >=3.3 email package unfold the header before parsing the header according to the following python issue: > > https://bugs.python.org/issue11050 Yes, the issue is closed because the fix has been merged and will be in Mailman Core 3.3.2. I agree that it appears that there would have been no issue if Mailman created messages using the `SMTP` policy and retrieved the addresses using the `addresses` attribute of the headers. However, for historical reasons, Mailman Core still uses the `compat32` policy (Python 3.2 compatibility) and uses `email.utils.getaddresses()` to get the addresses from the header value, so the "fix" for <https://bugs.python.org/issue11050> doesn't apply. Changing Mailman Core to use email.EmailMessage() objects rather than the legacy email.Message() objects is a worthwhile goal, but would require extensive changes to fix all the things that broke as a result. Anyway, I really appreciate your diligence in following through repeatedly on this issue. Were it not for that, I wouldn't have been motivated to fix it. For a look at why even a trivial change is not trivial, see the commits at <https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/merge_requests/652/commits>. The first of these is developing good tests for the issue and then fixing the code so the tests pass, and the second, unanticipated one was due to the fact that Python 3.5 didn't maintain the original ordering of the addresses in Cc: so I couldn't compare against a fixed result. This is due to the fact that the underlying code uses dictionaries, and prior to Python 3.6 dictionaries didn't preserve order. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

5 years, 8 months

[MM3-users] Re: Improve logging?

by Mark Sapiro

On 1/31/23 00:40, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > Some entries in the log files can be very scary, while in actual sense they > are harmless. > Such inconsequential, but scary entiess can mess up the well-being of a > SysAdmin. > I humbly request for the logs related to posts by non-members to a MM3 list > to be improved a little bit :-) > Here is the example in mailman.log: > > <cut> > Jan 31 10:03:54 2023 (92481) DISCARD: < > 2a1c588a6ccd47abbf57ee5fc61c9946(a)phellineconsultancy.co.ke>; ['The message > is not from a list member'] > [31/Jan/2023:10:04:48 +0300] "GET > /3.1/users/1bad08f703fe4bc0a829f4bdce10fc8f HTTP/1.1" 200 253 "-" "GNU > Mailman REST client v3.3.5" > [31/Jan/2023:10:04:48 +0300] "GET > /3.1/users/1bad08f703fe4bc0a829f4bdce10fc8f/addresses HTTP/1.1" 200 473 "-" > "GNU Mailman REST client v3.3.5" > Jan 31 10:18:09 2023 (92343) deque: do_confirm_verify > Traceback (most recent call last): > File > "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/mailman/app/workflow.py", > line 69, in __next__ > return step() > File > "/opt/mailman/mm/venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/mailman/app/subscriptions.py", > line 476, in _step_send_confirmation > raise StopIteration > StopIteration > </cut> > > Is there a possibility to change the logging engine to just *fold* the last > 7 lines into "The message is not from a list member. It was discarded", or > something close? No. This entry Jan 31 10:03:54 2023 (92481) DISCARD: <2a1c588a6ccd47abbf57ee5fc61c9946(a)phellineconsultancy.co.ke>; ['The message is not from a list member'] is a single entry about a discarded message. The next two are logging requests via the REST API that have nothing to do with the discard and are logged by a different module. The last entry with a traceback is yet another separate event. That one could probably be suppressed because raising StopIteration is a normal occurrence in workflow processing. -- Mark Sapiro <mark(a)msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan

3 years

[MM3-users] Re: Five Year Old Issue

by Brian Carpenter

On 3/14/21 8:10 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 3/14/21 5:07 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: >> It turns out Abhilash had done all the heavy lifting on this [1] but I didn't realize it because [2] hadn't been done. Since the rest was easy, [3] now fixes it. >> >> [1] https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/merge_requests/779 >> [2] https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/merge_requests/796 >> [3] https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/merge_requests/795 >> > > Ooops, [2] and [3] are reversed > > [2] https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/merge_requests/795 > [3] https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/merge_requests/796 > So this means the fix will show up in the next stable release? -- Brian Carpenter Harmonylists.com Emwd.com

4 years, 11 months

Search results for query "sapiro"