Good afternoon,
In the recent thread "alternative to skype", one member commented "Don't quote the entire email. In fact, don't quote anything at all when you reply. On k-9 mail there's a little x button (in the default config) that I can click to get rid of all the quotes text." Another responded on March 25: "No, do quote the part you are commenting on. It makes no sense to omit this. Of course it's all there in the archives but making your readers open a browser just to get the context of what you are talking about is poor practice. I note that posts via HyperKitty seem to do this but don't know if that's the way it works by default. If so it's a bug and should be fixed." I myself have experienced what the second member said, and I agree with him. List members respond to my posts in parts, but I have trouble knowing what specific part of my post the member is responding to.
I agree. I submitted fedora-infrastructure issue #6802 "HYPERKITTY does not show what posting text is being addressed in a reply." to address this. It can be viewed here: "https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6802".
Bill.
I agree. I submitted fedora-infrastructure issue #6802 "HYPERKITTY does not show what posting text is being addressed in a reply." to address this. It can be viewed here: "https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6802".
Thank you, Bill!
Sincerely,
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 22:34 +0000, chicago wrote:
I agree. I submitted fedora-infrastructure issue #6802 "HYPERKITTY does not show what posting text is being addressed in a reply." to address this. It can be viewed here: "https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6802".
Thank you, Bill!
I didn't get the post to which the above is a reply. I can see it in the list archive so perhaps it was sent from a Yahoo account, in which case there is a good chance that Gmail just threw it away, but there doesn't appear to be a way to check if this is the case using the HyperKitty interface.
poc
On 03/27/18 07:09, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 22:34 +0000, chicago wrote:
I agree. I submitted fedora-infrastructure issue #6802 "HYPERKITTY does not show what posting text is being addressed in a reply." to address this. It can be viewed here: "https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/6802".
Thank you, Bill!
I didn't get the post to which the above is a reply. I can see it in the list archive so perhaps it was sent from a Yahoo account, in which case there is a good chance that Gmail just threw it away, but there doesn't appear to be a way to check if this is the case using the HyperKitty interface.
I did not get it either and my domain's email is handled by gmail. I'm pretty sure I saw where "Home User" (a.k.a. Bill) is a yahoo user.
Anyway, Hyperkitty does a horrible job of quoting replies. I've added my comment, even though I don't use HK, to the ticket.
On 03/27/18 07:09, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I did not get it either and my domain's email is handled by gmail. I'm pretty sure I saw where "Home User" (a.k.a. Bill) is a yahoo user.
Yes, I am a yahoo user. If it makes a difference, I used HYPERKITTY, not an e-mail client and not yahoo's e-mail browser interface, to post the starting message to this thread, and this reply.
Anyway, Hyperkitty does a horrible job of quoting replies. I've added my comment, even though I don't use HK, to the ticket.
Thank-you Ed. Your comments were definitely better, clearer, than my issue description. Question: it was your list posting that alerted me that someone commented on the issue. I received no e-mail that someone commented on the issue. I would like to be notified by e-mail when someone adds a comment to any of my fedora-infrastructure issues. I saw no setting related to that. How do I arrange to be notified when someone adds a comment to any of my issues?
thanks, Bill.
On 03/27/2018 12:03 PM, home user wrote:
On 03/27/18 07:09, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I did not get it either and my domain's email is handled by gmail. I'm pretty sure I saw where "Home User" (a.k.a. Bill) is a yahoo user.
Yes, I am a yahoo user. If it makes a difference, I used HYPERKITTY, not an e-mail client and not yahoo's e-mail browser interface, to post the starting message to this thread, and this reply.
It doesn't matter either way.
If you have a yahoo.com address and send from your email client via yahoo's email servers, it still goes to fedoraprojects lists server and sends out from there. If you sent from hyperkitty it sends directly out from there. The problem is yahoo.com telling everyone that all email with a yahoo.com addres must come from a yahoo.com email server. In the case of email lists, this doesn't not happen.
Anyway, Hyperkitty does a horrible job of quoting replies. I've added my comment, even though I don't use HK, to the ticket.
Thank-you Ed. Your comments were definitely better, clearer, than my issue description. Question: it was your list posting that alerted me that someone commented on the issue. I received no e-mail that someone commented on the issue. I would like to be notified by e-mail when someone adds a comment to any of my fedora-infrastructure issues. I saw no setting related to that. How do I arrange to be notified when someone adds a comment to any of my issues?
Odd... you should get an email anytime the ticket updates automatically, not sure what is going on. Did you check your spam folder in case it ended up in there?
kevin
On 03/27/2018 12:03 PM, home user wrote:
It doesn't matter either way.
If you have a yahoo.com address and send from your email client via yahoo's email servers, it still goes to fedoraprojects lists server and sends out from there. If you sent from hyperkitty it sends directly out from there. The problem is yahoo.com telling everyone that all email with a yahoo.com addres must come from a yahoo.com email server. In the case of email lists, this doesn't not happen.
Odd... you should get an email anytime the ticket updates automatically, not sure what is going on. Did you check your spam folder in case it ended up in there?
kevin
Regardless of what email address is being used, is this ticket sufficient to address the quoting problems that the Hyperkitty interface has?
I have replied here to a long message posted by "kevin", expanded all the sections with the "..." and the reply only shows "On 03/27/2018 12:03 PM, home user wrote:" and only contains what "kevin" wrote. Extremely confusing.
Ed Greshko wrote:
On 03/27/2018 12:03 PM, home user wrote:
It doesn't matter either way.
If you have a yahoo.com address and send from your email client via yahoo's email servers, it still goes to fedoraprojects lists server and sends out from there. If you sent from hyperkitty it sends directly out from there. The problem is yahoo.com telling everyone that all email with a yahoo.com addres must come from a yahoo.com email server. In the case of email lists, this doesn't not happen.
Odd... you should get an email anytime the ticket updates automatically, not sure what is going on. Did you check your spam folder in case it ended up in there?
kevin
Regardless of what email address is being used, is this ticket sufficient to address the quoting problems that the Hyperkitty interface has?
I have replied here to a long message posted by "kevin", expanded all the sections with the "..." and the reply only shows "On 03/27/2018 12:03 PM, home user wrote:" and only contains what "kevin" wrote. Extremely confusing.
I am pretty sure that Hyperkitty simply doesn't include any "attribution" on its own. The "... wrote" being quoted is exactly what Kevin's mail client included. It's no less confusing, but it's not as much a bug as a mis-feature.
So it's really a feature request for Hyperkitty to include some form of "At ..., $user wrote:" attribution when it adds a quote from the message.
That might be sped up if someone reading is interested in filing a bug upstream and perhaps even providing a patch to hyperkitty. Someone from the infrastructure team may eventually be able to do just that, but I know they have many, many items on their list of tasks. :)
https://gitlab.com/mailman/hyperkitty/issues
I did a quick search for quote and attribution and didn't see any open items.
On 03/28/18 06:09, Todd Zullinger wrote:
I am pretty sure that Hyperkitty simply doesn't include any "attribution" on its own. The "... wrote" being quoted is exactly what Kevin's mail client included. It's no less confusing, but it's not as much a bug as a mis-feature.
OK. I believe you're right.
As a strictly email client user I hope fewer people will use the HyperKitty interface with these mis-features. :-)
I'll just add this to the list of things that confuse and/or bug me. Such as: Why as one gets older they mis-type more frequently and no amount of proof reading helps? And why do people use the word "one" when they mean "I". :-) :-)
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 06:44 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 03/28/18 06:09, Todd Zullinger wrote:
I am pretty sure that Hyperkitty simply doesn't include any "attribution" on its own. The "... wrote" being quoted is exactly what Kevin's mail client included. It's no less confusing, but it's not as much a bug as a mis-feature.
OK. I believe you're right.
As a strictly email client user I hope fewer people will use the HyperKitty interface with these mis-features. :-)
It's feature creep. The unwarranted desire to turn a simple archive page into a full-featured web forum interface, which AFAIK nobody asked for and which doesn't appear to really work. This is a mailing list. It's incomprehensible to me that anyone would want to use a clunky web interface instead of a mail client (even if it's a web email client) for functions which are specific to email.
I'll just add this to the list of things that confuse and/or bug me. Such as: Why as one gets older they mis-type more frequently and no amount of proof reading helps? And why do people use the word "one" when they mean "I". :-) :-)
One likes to appear detached :-)
poc
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
As a strictly email client user I hope fewer people will use the HyperKitty interface with these mis-features. :-)
It's feature creep. The unwarranted desire to turn a simple archive page into a full-featured web forum interface, which AFAIK nobody asked for and which doesn't appear to really work.
I don't think that's quite fair. It seems like it works reasonably well to me. Clearly there are folks who use it and while this quoting attribution issue is confusing, there are many folks who post regularly from mail clients that cause as much confusion by poorly quoting and/or using bad html to plain text conversions, etc.
This is a mailing list. It's incomprehensible to me that anyone would want to use a clunky web interface instead of a mail client (even if it's a web email client) for functions which are specific to email.
I can't imagine how anyone uses most mail clients, web and GUI mail clients seem awful to me. But as long as the mail arrives to me in decent form, I don't much care how it got to me. :)
The hyperkitty archiver has definitely improved on several long-standing issues with the previous pipermail archiver.
If a message ever needs to be removed or otherwise edited in the archive, it no longer invalidates links to all the messages in the archive.
And it's now much easier to link to a thread and all the messages in it instead of only to individual messages.
Both of those are very nice improvements, I think.
I'll just add this to the list of things that confuse and/or bug me. Such as: Why as one gets older they mis-type more frequently and no amount of proof reading helps? And why do people use the word "one" when they mean "I". :-) :-)
One likes to appear detached :-)
Haha. And it might be better than finding oneself using "we" as if to account for all the voices in one's head. :)
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 11:43 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
As a strictly email client user I hope fewer people will use the HyperKitty interface with these mis-features. :-)
It's feature creep. The unwarranted desire to turn a simple archive page into a full-featured web forum interface, which AFAIK nobody asked for and which doesn't appear to really work.
I don't think that's quite fair. It seems like it works reasonably well to me. Clearly there are folks who use it and while this quoting attribution issue is confusing, there are many folks who post regularly from mail clients that cause as much confusion by poorly quoting and/or using bad html to plain text conversions, etc.
That's true. Of course they shouldn't be posting in HTML in the first place (as per the list Guidelines) but I take your point.
This is a mailing list. It's incomprehensible to me that anyone would want to use a clunky web interface instead of a mail client (even if it's a web email client) for functions which are specific to email.
I can't imagine how anyone uses most mail clients, web and GUI mail clients seem awful to me. But as long as the mail arrives to me in decent form, I don't much care how it got to me. :)
We'll have to agree to differ. I'm reasonably happy with Evolution.
The hyperkitty archiver has definitely improved on several long-standing issues with the previous pipermail archiver.
The front page for the month of March shows the most recent 10 messages with a lot of white space. Compare the Evolution (old-style) list archive:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/2017-March/thread.html
I know which is more useful to me. For one thing the old-style page shows all of March. I can also sort it by Date or by Author. To find (say) messages from around March 25 in HK, I have to click through an unknown number of intermediate pages and even then the dates of messages are not shown unless I open them. There's apparently no way to search for a specific date so I guess I have to do mental arithmetic to figure out how old the message is relative to the present.
If a message ever needs to be removed or otherwise edited in the archive, it no longer invalidates links to all the messages in the archive.
That may be so, in which case it's a plus, but more for the admins than for the users.
And it's now much easier to link to a thread and all the messages in it instead of only to individual messages.
An example of a link to a thread:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/2017-March/msg00087.html
poc
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
The front page for the month of March shows the most recent 10 messages with a lot of white space. Compare the Evolution (old-style) list archive:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/2017-March/thread.html
I know which is more useful to me. For one thing the old-style page shows all of March. I can also sort it by Date or by Author. To find (say) messages from around March 25 in HK, I have to click through an unknown number of intermediate pages and even then the dates of messages are not shown unless I open them. There's apparently no way to search for a specific date so I guess I have to do mental arithmetic to figure out how old the message is relative to the present.
FWIW, you can change the number of threads shown per page at the bottom. The default is 10, but you can choose up to 200, which gets you all the threads from March.
Better searching and date display would be nice improvements. Hopefully someone that wants them submits patches to implement them.
If a message ever needs to be removed or otherwise edited in the archive, it no longer invalidates links to all the messages in the archive.
That may be so, in which case it's a plus, but more for the admins than for the users.
As a site admin, I might not even read the list, so I might not care that I broke all the links to other messages which users had inserted in their messages. I very much belive the stable message links in the archive is a user benefit.
It's main benefit to admins is that it allows them to remove or alter a message without having to annoy all the users of the list(s). :)
And it's now much easier to link to a thread and all the messages in it instead of only to individual messages.
An example of a link to a thread:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/2017-March/msg00087.html
The way I see it, that's a link to a message. Sure, it shows one link to a follow-up message below it. But there are dozens of messages in that thread and they are not shown in the pipermail archives. If you follow one follow-up message you can easily end up having to back up a few levels to get back to replies from earlier in the thread.
I'm not trying to say that hyperkitty is infinitely better than pipermail. It's better, worse, and different depending on the area and the preference of the user. I do believe that it's an overall improvement. And for better or worse, it's the archiver we've got. :)
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 12:38 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
The front page for the month of March shows the most recent 10 messages with a lot of white space. Compare the Evolution (old-style) list archive:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/2017-March/thread.html
I know which is more useful to me. For one thing the old-style page shows all of March. I can also sort it by Date or by Author. To find (say) messages from around March 25 in HK, I have to click through an unknown number of intermediate pages and even then the dates of messages are not shown unless I open them. There's apparently no way to search for a specific date so I guess I have to do mental arithmetic to figure out how old the message is relative to the present.
FWIW, you can change the number of threads shown per page at the bottom. The default is 10, but you can choose up to 200, which gets you all the threads from March.
I'm not seeing that. There are some buttons that let you expand the number of messages in increments of 5, but the maximum is nowhere near 200.
BTW, I attempted to answer this in HK. Clicked on Reply, clicked on the Quote button, expanded the dinky text input pane and started typing away. Then I noticed the "Use email software" button. Great! Clicked there and it opened a Gmail composer, with an empty message. My text was gone. Hit the Back button and returned to the page. Nope, everything I had typed had vanished. It had also lost the position of the message I was replying to. And there's no way to save a draft message and return to it.
This is not an improved experience.
And it's now much easier to link to a thread and all the messages in it instead of only to individual messages.
An example of a link to a thread:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/evolution-list/2017-March/msg00087.html
The way I see it, that's a link to a message. Sure, it shows one link to a follow-up message below it. But there are dozens of messages in that thread and they are not shown in the pipermail archives. If you follow one follow-up message you can easily end up having to back up a few levels to get back to replies from earlier in the thread.
Click on the [Thread Index] button at the foot of the page. It shows you all the threads. Granted this is different from HK. I happen to think it's better.
I'm not trying to say that hyperkitty is infinitely better than pipermail. It's better, worse, and different depending on the area and the preference of the user. I do believe that it's an overall improvement. And for better or worse, it's the archiver we've got. :)
As one who has administered email systems for a large population of users (a university environment with a much more snarky and entitled user population) I appreciate that canvassing for opinions on a change like this will never get you consensus. All the same, it's nice to be asked, which (IIRC) we never were, at least on this list (do correct me if I'm wrong). However I've said my piece and won't bang on about it.
poc
I wrote:
That might be sped up if someone reading is interested in filing a bug upstream and perhaps even providing a patch to hyperkitty. Someone from the infrastructure team may eventually be able to do just that, but I know they have many, many items on their list of tasks. :)
https://gitlab.com/mailman/hyperkitty/issues
I believe the place to add this would be around here in the source:
https://gitlab.com/mailman/hyperkitty/blob/master/hyperkitty/static/hyperkit...
I don't use javascript much and I'm not curious enough to setup a hyperkitty dev environment to test this, but something like this might be what's needed:
diff --git i/hyperkitty/static/hyperkitty/js/hyperkitty-thread.js w/hyperkitty/static/hyperkitty/js/hyperkitty-thread.js index bd17e98..fbb2369 100644 --- i/hyperkitty/static/hyperkitty/js/hyperkitty-thread.js +++ w/hyperkitty/static/hyperkitty/js/hyperkitty-thread.js @@ -252,10 +252,13 @@ function setup_replies() { if (sig_index != -1) { quoted = quoted.substr(0, sig_index); } + // set reply attribution + var attribution = $(this).parents(".email").first() + .find(".email-body").clone().text() + ' wrote:'; // add quotation marks quoted = $.trim(quoted).replace(/^/mg, "> "); // insert before any previous text - textarea.val(quoted + "\n" + textarea.val()); + textarea.val(attribution + "\n" + quoted + "\n" + textarea.val()); textarea.focus(); }); function set_new_thread(checkbox) {
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 22:34 +0000, chicago wrote:
I didn't get the post to which the above is a reply. I can see it in the list archive so perhaps it was sent from a Yahoo account, in which case there is a good chance that Gmail just threw it away, but there doesn't appear to be a way to check if this is the case using the HyperKitty interface.
poc
FWIW, this reply is coming from Hyperkitty.
Bad Kitty, Bad Kitty. :-)
I didn't get the post to which the above is a reply.
It is just my luck that I'm very good at proving myself wrong. Had I not quoted anything (like I initially proposed), people would see just a lone "Thank you, Bill" with no context.
I learned something new. Thanks, hyper kitty :p
Sincerely,
On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 00:24 +0000, Ed Greshko wrote:
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 22:34 +0000, chicago wrote:
I didn't get the post to which the above is a reply. I can see it in the list archive so perhaps it was sent from a Yahoo account, in which case there is a good chance that Gmail just threw it away, but there doesn't appear to be a way to check if this is the case using the HyperKitty interface.
poc
FWIW, this reply is coming from Hyperkitty.
Bad Kitty, Bad Kitty. :-)
Yes, it's really not to my taste at all, much worse than the old archive interface IMHO. At least the old one didn't try to be a web- based forum and limited itself to showing archived list messages. This in my view was a Good Thing and the change of focus is a mistake. I find it significantly harder to use simply to look up an archived thread from a specific date, which is what I mainly want it for.
"Do one thing and do it well" seems to have been forgotten.
poc
Some of you have neat sayings beneath your signature. A good one in this thread is "Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.".
I'm seeing comments implying that messages from yahoo-based member accounts are not reaching members with gmail-based member accounts. I'm wondering if this might be one of those conjectures based on incomplete information. Has anyone actually tried to diagnose the problem? Are the messages disappearing because - I use HYPERKITTY to post them? - my account is based on a yahoo e-mail address? - your account is based on a gmail e-mail address? - something else? (I realize there could be more than one cause.)
Bill.
On 28/3/18 6:34 am, home user wrote:
Some of you have neat sayings beneath your signature. A good one in this thread is "Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.".
I'm seeing comments implying that messages from yahoo-based member accounts are not reaching members with gmail-based member accounts. I'm wondering if this might be one of those conjectures based on incomplete information. Has anyone actually tried to diagnose the problem? Are the messages disappearing because
- I use HYPERKITTY to post them?
- my account is based on a yahoo e-mail address?
- your account is based on a gmail e-mail address?
- something else?
(I realize there could be more than one cause.)
Bill.
Just my 2 cents worth, the email address I have registered on this list for emails to be sent to is neither Yahoo nor Gmail, it is an address that is specific to my ISP, and I had no issues whatsoever with receiving any emails on this thread, but having said that I have occasionally on other threads had issues with seeing all the mails, based on comments in replies, which indicated either the list didn't get the mail because it was sent directly to the OP, or it didn't get to me for whatever reason.
regards,
Steve
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi Bill,
home user wrote:
Some of you have neat sayings beneath your signature. A good one in this thread is "Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.".
I'm seeing comments implying that messages from yahoo-based member accounts are not reaching members with gmail-based member accounts. I'm wondering if this might be one of those conjectures based on incomplete information. Has anyone actually tried to diagnose the problem?
Unfortunately, it is not conjecture. :(
Are the messages disappearing because
- I use HYPERKITTY to post them?
- my account is based on a yahoo e-mail address?
- your account is based on a gmail e-mail address?
- something else?
(I realize there could be more than one cause.)
It's primarily because your address is @yahoo.com. In 2014, Yahoo began using an agressive DMARC setting with a policy to reject all yahoo.com mail that fails DMARC. Not all domains which recieve mail respect this, but Gmail is one that does. That's why list messages from @yahoo.com addresses don't reach users @gmail.com.
I am not familiar enough with DMARC and Mailman3 to know whether there are any work-arounds available for this issue or not. There aren't any great solutions to it, in any case. If someone knows differently it would be great if they could reach out to the Fedora Infrastructure team with details (ideally in the form of a patch ;) ).
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure
If you want to read more about this issue, search the web for something like: yahoo dmarc mailing lists
I wrote:
I am not familiar enough with DMARC and Mailman3 to know whether there are any work-arounds available for this issue or not. There aren't any great solutions to it, in any case.
A little further reading tells me that Mailman supports a few possible work-arounds¹. I've mentioned these to the list admins and will see if any of them are worth testing².
¹ https://wiki.list.org/DEV/DMARC ² Only 'Replace From:' or 'Wrap message' would be reasonable for this list, IMO. If it were @aol.com causing this trouble, I'd be more inclined to suggest the 'Discard' option. ;)
Hi all,
As we've discussed in this thread and others recently, messages from subscribers @yahoo.com do not reach subscribers @gmail.com (among others). This is due to an aggressive policy set by Yahoo which breaks mail sent via the mailing list.
The mitigation enabled should change the From: address of the outgoing mail to the list address. This should only apply to users of @yahoo.com and other domains which set a similar DMARC policy. Subscribers at other domains should see no change to the From: address of mail they send to the list.
I believe that only the email address will be changed, and not the sender's name, but I am not certain of that yet.
Hopefully this mitigation will work well and provide an overall improvement to the list. If not, we'll revert it.
All that said, the best solution would be to stop using @yahoo.com as a mail provider -- at least for mailing lists. They have repeatedly caused grief to the folks that manage the Fedora Project mail systems.
As far back as 2010, the previous lead of the Fedora Infrastructure team posted about one of the common problems @yahoo.com caused:
https://mmcgrath.livejournal.com/37248.html
On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 17:27 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Hi all,
As we've discussed in this thread and others recently, messages from subscribers @yahoo.com do not reach subscribers @gmail.com (among others). This is due to an aggressive policy set by Yahoo which breaks mail sent via the mailing list.
The mitigation enabled should change the From: address of the outgoing mail to the list address. This should only apply to users of @yahoo.com and other domains which set a similar DMARC policy. Subscribers at other domains should see no change to the From: address of mail they send to the list.
I believe that only the email address will be changed, and not the sender's name, but I am not certain of that yet.
Hopefully this mitigation will work well and provide an overall improvement to the list. If not, we'll revert it.
That seems to be a sensible change. Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
Of course as long as nothing appears we'll have to keep checking HK to see if we're missing something ...
poc
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 17:27 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Hi all,
As we've discussed in this thread and others recently, messages from subscribers @yahoo.com do not reach subscribers @gmail.com (among others). This is due to an aggressive policy set by Yahoo which breaks mail sent via the mailing list.
The mitigation enabled should change the From: address of the outgoing mail to the list address. This should only apply to users of @yahoo.com and other domains which set a similar DMARC policy. Subscribers at other domains should see no change to the From: address of mail they send to the list.
I believe that only the email address will be changed, and not the sender's name, but I am not certain of that yet.
I did check the mailman source code and it does leave the user name mostly untouched. So (presuming @example.com has a DMARC 'reject' policy),
From: Some User someuser@example.com
would be changed to
From: Some User via users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hopefully this mitigation will work well and provide an overall improvement to the list. If not, we'll revert it.
That seems to be a sensible change. Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
Of course as long as nothing appears we'll have to keep checking HK to see if we're missing something ...
Or you'll notice replies to messages you've not seen. :)
Maybe we'll be lucky and everyone will move off @yahoo.com, giving the infrastructure team a nice present.
On Tue, 2018-03-27 at 18:25 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
That seems to be a sensible change. Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
Of course as long as nothing appears we'll have to keep checking HK to see if we're missing something ...
Or you'll notice replies to messages you've not seen. :)
Indeed.
Maybe we'll be lucky and everyone will move off @yahoo.com, giving the infrastructure team a nice present.
Fat chance :-)
poc
Allegedly, on or about 27 March 2018, Todd Zullinger sent:
All that said, the best solution would be to stop using @yahoo.com as a mail provider -- at least for mailing lists. They have repeatedly caused grief to the folks that manage the Fedora Project mail systems.
And that'll only work until the next mail service provider does the same thing (insist mail addressed from them goes through them). Which, supposedly, they should all be doing.
Likewise, with the converse. Recipient mail service providers insisting that mail from somewhere must come through them, regardless of the fact that's not always practical or possible.
Case in point; many of us have our own domains, and will use them to the fullest extent (use our domain name, post through our servers), yet our ISPs interfere (intercept passing mail, and route it through their own servers).
In some ways I don't mind the notion that a mail server may remove our addresses from the post, preventing spam from personally reaching us, and stopping private replies. But it heads towards anonymising the mail, making it easier for someone to be an ass, or impersonate other people.
First, thanks for replying. It shows the list changes in action. At least it appears to work as intended. :)
Tim via users wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 27 March 2018, Todd Zullinger sent:
All that said, the best solution would be to stop using @yahoo.com as a mail provider -- at least for mailing lists. They have repeatedly caused grief to the folks that manage the Fedora Project mail systems.
And that'll only work until the next mail service provider does the same thing (insist mail addressed from them goes through them). Which, supposedly, they should all be doing.
Yeah. DMARC isn't the primary reason for bashing Yahoo. It's more that they have repeatedly blocked all mail from Fedora domains after a few users signed up for a list, forgot how to get off it, and marked it as spam. I've never managed the Fedora domains, but I've managed others and that sort of thing always left a lasting impression on me.
Likewise, with the converse. Recipient mail service providers insisting that mail from somewhere must come through them, regardless of the fact that's not always practical or possible.
Case in point; many of us have our own domains, and will use them to the fullest extent (use our domain name, post through our servers), yet our ISPs interfere (intercept passing mail, and route it through their own servers).
Are there (m)any ISPs that block the submission port (587)? I know many block port 25, but if you're running your own mail server, you really just need to do it from IP space that you control.
For me, the worst part of having port 25 blocked these days is that it makes it slightly harder to diagnose issues with remote mail servers (but only very slightly).
In some ways I don't mind the notion that a mail server may remove our addresses from the post, preventing spam from personally reaching us, and stopping private replies. But it heads towards anonymising the mail, making it easier for someone to be an ass, or impersonate other people.
Indeed. It's an interesting balancing act.
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:27:40 -0400 Todd Zullinger tmz@pobox.com wrote:
Hi all,
As we've discussed in this thread and others recently, messages from subscribers @yahoo.com do not reach subscribers @gmail.com (among others). This is due to an aggressive policy set by Yahoo which breaks mail sent via the mailing list.
The mitigation enabled should change the From: address of the outgoing mail to the list address. This should only apply to users of @yahoo.com and other domains which set a similar DMARC policy. Subscribers at other domains should see no change to the From: address of mail they send to the list.
I believe that only the email address will be changed, and not the sender's name, but I am not certain of that yet.
Hopefully this mitigation will work well and provide an overall improvement to the list. If not, we'll revert it.
Would this change be why I'm suddenly seeing oodles of old messages showing up on the list? Messages that I've already seen, since I don't have a problem with messages from yahoo addresses being invisible. I'm not sure what this will do to any messages I've saved - will they be deleted when I delete these old messages that are showing up as if they are new?
stan wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:27:40 -0400 Todd Zullinger tmz@pobox.com wrote:
As we've discussed in this thread and others recently, messages from subscribers @yahoo.com do not reach subscribers @gmail.com (among others). This is due to an aggressive policy set by Yahoo which breaks mail sent via the mailing list.
The mitigation enabled should change the From: address of the outgoing mail to the list address. This should only apply to users of @yahoo.com and other domains which set a similar DMARC policy. Subscribers at other domains should see no change to the From: address of mail they send to the list.
I believe that only the email address will be changed, and not the sender's name, but I am not certain of that yet.
Hopefully this mitigation will work well and provide an overall improvement to the list. If not, we'll revert it.
Would this change be why I'm suddenly seeing oodles of old messages showing up on the list? Messages that I've already seen, since I don't have a problem with messages from yahoo addresses being invisible.
This shouldn't be related to that. All it does is change the From: field of messages sent from domains with very strict DMARC policies, so that they use the list address. The sender name is kept, with 'via $list_name' appended.
I'm not sure what this will do to any messages I've saved
- will they be deleted when I delete these old messages
that are showing up as if they are new?
No change we make to the list settings could affect your saved messages. (I'm presuming that you're referring to messages saved in your email client.)
On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 11:49:28 -0400 Todd Zullinger tmz@pobox.com wrote:
This shouldn't be related to that. All it does is change the From: field of messages sent from domains with very strict DMARC policies, so that they use the list address. The sender name is kept, with 'via $list_name' appended.
Then why all of a sudden am I seeing these old messages? I've seen messages from as long ago as last November, but most are from February and March. And coincidentally, they started at around the time you made the change. :-) Since I get my mail as pop3, and the messages are saved on the mail server, is there any way that some header field could be telling the mail server that those old messages are suddenly new again? Or is it more likely that they made a change to their mail servers at the same time that you made a change to the Fedora mailing lists?
No change we make to the list settings could affect your saved messages. (I'm presuming that you're referring to messages saved in your email client.)
That's what I thought, but it is good to have confirmation. My thought is if the same message comes in as new that I have saved, it must have different header metadata of some sort or the client would show it as already read.
On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 11:49:28 -0400 Todd Zullinger tmz@pobox.com wrote:
Would this change be why I'm suddenly seeing oodles of old messages showing up on the list? Messages that I've already seen, since I don't have a problem with messages from yahoo addresses being invisible.
This shouldn't be related to that. All it does is change the From: field of messages sent from domains with very strict DMARC policies, so that they use the list address. The sender name is kept, with 'via $list_name' appended.
I checked the headers on some of the messages, and they show the original date for the mail, while the receipt from the client shows today. That to me indicates that it is a problem at my email service provider, and I'll take it up with them.
Thanks.
(replying to several posts, including some in the two sub-threads)
(Kevin; 3/27 1:03pm (mountain time?))
Did you check your spam folder in case it ended up in there?
I did, after seeing your question. The messages were there. Thank-you.
(Ed; 3/27 3:53pm (mountain time?))
I have replied here to a long message posted by "kevin", expanded all the sections with the "..." and the reply only shows "On 03/27/2018 12:03 PM, home user wrote:" and only contains what "kevin" wrote. Extremely confusing.
I see the same thing. Later, I'll go back to the issue and add a comment about this. A fix might be needed to handle quotes within quotes. (recursion. ouch.)
(Todd; 3/28 9:43am) I agree.
(yahoo.com address) Burned into my memory is a TV network newscast report several years ago in which one reporter sent a gmail to a coworker. He mentioned lunch in that message. Seconds later, the recipient received an ad for a pizzeria. Gmail is well known to not respect the privacy of message contents. I highly value privacy. Now yahoo mail has gone downhill since then (hacked twice big-time!). I don't know if gmail has become more respecting of privacy. I'm thinking of switching. But I'm reluctant. (I wonder if this list will now get a message containing a pizzeria ad.) I do understand the posts about yahoo.com, DMARC, etc.
(Patrick; 3/27 3:58pm)
Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
This post should qualify as one test. By the way, how many of this list's members use yahoo.com for this list?
Why as one gets older they mis-type more frequently and no amount of proof reading helps? And why do people use the word "one" when they mean "I". :-) :-)
Hmmm... So one am not the only one?! :-) Encouraging... one think.
Haha. And it might be better than finding oneself using "we" as if to account for all the voices in one's head. :)
I notice that at least one member posting in this thread has two avatars!
Thank-you for the participation and the efforts to fix this. Bill.
home user via users wrote:
This post should qualify as one test.
Indeed. The from is munged to:
From: home user via users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Unless we find some nasty gotcha that isn't obvious, I think the settings change is a win. If it works here, it might be worth setting as the default for other fedoraproject.org lists.
By the way, how many of this list's members use yahoo.com for this list?
Good question. I grabbed a copy of the subscriber list to check. Here's the top 25 domains:
$ awk -F@ '{print $2}' ~/tmp/fedora-users-subscribers | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -n25 2019 gmail.com 222 yahoo.com 155 hotmail.com 86 redhat.com 60 fedoraproject.org 59 comcast.net 26 googlemail.com 19 earthlink.net 18 verizon.net 17 yahoo.co.in 15 yahoo.co.uk 15 sbcglobal.net 15 gmx.de 14 cox.net 14 bellsouth.net 13 web.de 12 msn.com 12 gmx.net 12 att.net 11 charter.net 10 live.com 9 pobox.com 9 netscape.net 8 sympatico.ca 8 outlook.com
I am pretty shocked at the sheer amount of gmail.com addresses. I know it's popular, but I didn't expect that it so utterly dominated the subscriber count.
There are a little over 5,400 subscribers in total.
I notice that at least one member posting in this thread has two avatars!
I imagine from posting via different addresses? I hope we don't count multiple addresses as multiple personalities in a bad way. If so, I'm in trouble based on the large pile of addresses I've accumulated over the years. ;)
On 03/28/2018 10:12 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
home user via users wrote:
This post should qualify as one test.
Indeed. The from is munged to:
From: home user via users <users@lists.fedoraproject.org>Unless we find some nasty gotcha that isn't obvious, I think the settings change is a win. If it works here, it might be worth setting as the default for other fedoraproject.org lists.
By the way, how many of this list's members use yahoo.com for this list?
Good question. I grabbed a copy of the subscriber list to check. Here's the top 25 domains:
$ awk -F@ '{print $2}' ~/tmp/fedora-users-subscribers | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -n25 2019 gmail.com 222 yahoo.com 155 hotmail.com 86 redhat.com 60 fedoraproject.org 59 comcast.net 26 googlemail.com 19 earthlink.net 18 verizon.net 17 yahoo.co.in 15 yahoo.co.uk 15 sbcglobal.net 15 gmx.de 14 cox.net 14 bellsouth.net 13 web.de 12 msn.com 12 gmx.net 12 att.net 11 charter.net 10 live.com 9 pobox.com 9 netscape.net 8 sympatico.ca 8 outlook.com
I am pretty shocked at the sheer amount of gmail.com addresses. I know it's popular, but I didn't expect that it so utterly dominated the subscriber count.
Remember that anyone with an Android device has a gmail account as well. The ease with which you can set up a gmail account makes many people use those as "scratch" accounts as well (for non-critical mail). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks@alldigital.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 22643734 Yahoo: origrps2 - - - - Blessed are the peacekeepers...for they shall be shot at - - from both sides. --A.M. Greeley - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 16:46 +0000, home user via users wrote:
(Patrick; 3/27 3:58pm)
Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
This post should qualify as one test.
Yes, that's working.
poc
Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On March 28, 2018 3:15 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 16:46 +0000, home user via users wrote:
(Patrick; 3/27 3:58pm)
Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working
and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
This post should qualify as one test.
Yes, that's working.
poc
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
I have unsubscribed from my yahoo email account. I did not see some messages. I looked at the archives and there were some replies to some of my questions. One was from Tim, but I did not see it in my yahoo mail :( Maybe it went to spam, but I did not check. Hopefully we will be better off now.
Best Regards,
Antonio
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 16:27 -0400, None via users wrote:
Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On March 28, 2018 3:15 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2018-03-28 at 16:46 +0000, home user via users wrote:
(Patrick; 3/27 3:58pm)
Perhaps one or two yahoo.com users could post here just to check it's working
and we gmail.com users can see their messages.
This post should qualify as one test.
Yes, that's working.
poc
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
I have unsubscribed from my yahoo email account. I did not see some messages. I looked at the archives and there were some replies to some of my questions. One was from Tim, but I did not see it in my yahoo mail :( Maybe it went to spam, but I did not check. Hopefully we will be better off now.
As I understand it, the problem is not that Gmail marks it as spam (which you could recover from your spam folder) but that it simply drops the message completely because of the DMARC indicator.
poc
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
As I understand it, the problem is not that Gmail marks it as spam (which you could recover from your spam folder) but that it simply drops the message completely because of the DMARC indicator.
poc _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
In my case Gmail does mark all yahoo mail as spam. In order to correct this I created:
The following filters are applied to all incoming mail: Matches: list: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do this: Never send it to Spam
Since creating this filter all list messages, including yahoo, come to my inbox.
On 03/29/18 08:01, Stephen Perkins wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
As I understand it, the problem is not that Gmail marks it as spam (which you could recover from your spam folder) but that it simply drops the message completely because of the DMARC indicator.
poc _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
In my case Gmail does mark all yahoo mail as spam. In order to correct this I created:
The following filters are applied to all incoming mail: Matches: list: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do this: Never send it to Spam
Since creating this filter all list messages, including yahoo, come to my inbox.
I have a similar filter that places "user list" email in a folder. It is also defined with "Never send it to Spam".
I do not get any yahoo.com mails to the list in my folder.
On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 08:10 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 03/29/18 08:01, Stephen Perkins wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan pocallaghan@gmail.com wrote:
As I understand it, the problem is not that Gmail marks it as spam (which you could recover from your spam folder) but that it simply drops the message completely because of the DMARC indicator.
poc _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
In my case Gmail does mark all yahoo mail as spam. In order to correct this I created:
The following filters are applied to all incoming mail: Matches: list: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do this: Never send it to Spam
Since creating this filter all list messages, including yahoo, come to my inbox.
I have a similar filter that places "user list" email in a folder. It is also defined with "Never send it to Spam".
I do not get any yahoo.com mails to the list in my folder.
Same here. Neither my list folder nor my spam folder contain list messages from Yahoo accounts.
poc
-
chicago -
Ed Greshko -
Ed Greshko -
home user -
Kevin Fenzi -
olivares33561＠protonmail.com -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Rick Stevens -
stan -
Stephen Morris -
Stephen Perkins -
Tim -
Todd Zullinger