Thread: Migration to PGLister - After

Greetings!

This list has now been migrated to new mailing list software known as
'PGLister'.  This migration will impact all users of this mailing list
in one way or another.

If you would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list, please click on
'Show Original' or 'Show Headers' in your client and find the
'List-Unsubscribe' header which will include a link that you can click
on (or copy/paste into your browser) and use to unsubscribe yourself
from this list.

The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found
on the wiki here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce the
current version of which is also included below.

Thank you!

Stephen

On 11/20/2017 6:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found
> on the wiki here:https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce  the
> current version of which is also included below.


A peeve on this new configuration:    if someone does a reply-all and 
sends both direct and list responses, the direct response ends up in my 
regular inbox because it doesn't have the List-ID... Previously, the 
direct reply would still have the Subject: [listname] that I filtered 
on, so it too would end up in my 'postgres' folder, where I want it.

I realize why this was done, and yada yada, what a mess.


-- 
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

On 11/20/2017 09:32 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 6:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found
>> on the wiki here:https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce  the
>> current version of which is also included below.
>
>
> A peeve on this new configuration:    if someone does a reply-all and 
> sends both direct and list responses, the direct response ends up in 
> my regular inbox because it doesn't have the List-ID... Previously, 
> the direct reply would still have the Subject: [listname] that I 
> filtered on, so it too would end up in my 'postgres' folder, where I 
> want it.
>
> I realize why this was done, and yada yada, what a mess.
>

Yep, but that is why the list-id filter is bad advice (at least for me). 
I filter on the list email address and it works flawlessly.

JD



-- 
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc

PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://pgconf.org
*****     Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.   *****

Greetings,

* John R Pierce (pierce@hogranch.com) wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 6:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found
> >on the wiki here:https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce  the
> >current version of which is also included below.
>
> A peeve on this new configuration:    if someone does a reply-all
> and sends both direct and list responses, the direct response ends
> up in my regular inbox because it doesn't have the List-ID...
> Previously, the direct reply would still have the Subject:
> [listname] that I filtered on, so it too would end up in my
> 'postgres' folder, where I want it.
>
> I realize why this was done, and yada yada, what a mess.

Indeed.  Not much we can do about that, unfortunately.  Subject is not
something we're able to change.

Personally, I've always had emails which cc'd me going into my inbox and
prefer it, but I can see the counter-argument.  There is an option in
pglister to not receive *both*, but that means that you only get the
email which is sent directly to you and I realize you'd prefer the
opposite, but I don't see any way for us to address that while still
following the DKIM, et al, rules.

Thanks!

Stephen

Josh,

* Joshua D. Drake (jd@commandprompt.com) wrote:
> Yep, but that is why the list-id filter is bad advice (at least for
> me). I filter on the list email address and it works flawlessly.

Indeed, this depends on what you're looking to do.  Filtering on
addresses listed in the To/CC is another approach and might work for
some, but it really depends on what you want.

If you do filter on the addresses listed in the To/CC, then it would
probably make sense to turn off the 'extra copy' option in the PGLister
configuration to avoid having duplicates.

If, as I do, you'd prefer to have both and to have the emails sent
through the list end up in a specific folder with the emails sent
directly to you going to your inbox, then using List-Id is the better
approach.

As mentioned up-thread, this isn't something we're able to really
control on the PGLister side, however.

Thanks!

Stephen

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Yep, but that is why the list-id filter is bad advice (at least for me). I
> filter on the list email address and it works flawlessly.

Joshua,
  This does not work if the procmail recipe is for pgsql-general@postgresql.org
and the source includes the server; e.g, pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org.
Perhaps adding '.*' in front of postgresql.org will fix this.

Rich

On 20/11/17 18:32, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 11/20/2017 6:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found
>> on the wiki here:https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce  the
>> current version of which is also included below.
> 
> 
> A peeve on this new configuration:    if someone does a reply-all and
> sends both direct and list responses, the direct response ends up in my
> regular inbox because it doesn't have the List-ID... Previously, the
> direct reply would still have the Subject: [listname] that I filtered
> on, so it too would end up in my 'postgres' folder, where I want it.
> 
> I realize why this was done, and yada yada, what a mess.
> 
> 


People shouldn't do "Reply All" unless they really want you to see the
reply.

Comparing old and new:

List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org>

has become:

List-Id: <pgsql-general.lists.postgresql.org>


Notice the case changes (from 'ID' -> 'Id') and 'lists' is inserted in
the middle.  Were both of those changes intentional?  Mail headers are
not case sensitive so good filtering software shouldn't notice the
former but everybody will be annoyed by the latter.

Regards,

Daniel

Greetings Rich,

* Rich Shepard (rshepard@appl-ecosys.com) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >Yep, but that is why the list-id filter is bad advice (at least for me). I
> >filter on the list email address and it works flawlessly.
>
>   This does not work if the procmail recipe is for pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> and the source includes the server; e.g, pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org.
> Perhaps adding '.*' in front of postgresql.org will fix this.

Yes, for a while both of those addresses will work and therefore you'd
need to handle both addresses (there's a few different ways you could do
that; with a regexp, I'd suggest something more specific, eg: (lists.)?
).

Thanks!

Stephen

Greetings,

* Daniel Pocock (daniel@pocock.pro) wrote:
> On 20/11/17 18:32, John R Pierce wrote:
> > On 11/20/2017 6:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> The changes which we expect to be most significant to users can be found
> >> on the wiki here:https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGLister_Announce  the
> >> current version of which is also included below.
> >
> > A peeve on this new configuration:    if someone does a reply-all and
> > sends both direct and list responses, the direct response ends up in my
> > regular inbox because it doesn't have the List-ID... Previously, the
> > direct reply would still have the Subject: [listname] that I filtered
> > on, so it too would end up in my 'postgres' folder, where I want it.
> >
> > I realize why this was done, and yada yada, what a mess.
>
> People shouldn't do "Reply All" unless they really want you to see the
> reply.

The general policy on this list is to do 'reply all', as there's often
people sending email to the lists who are not also subscribed (but also
because there are people, such as myself, who would prefer to get both
emails).

> Comparing old and new:
>
> List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org>
>
> has become:
>
> List-Id: <pgsql-general.lists.postgresql.org>

Yes, that's correct.

Thanks!

Stephen

My procmail filter is now:

*  H ?? ^TO_pgsql-.*@(lists.)?postgresql.org


On 2017-11-20 09:49, Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Yep, but that is why the list-id filter is bad advice (at least for 
>> me). I
>> filter on the list email address and it works flawlessly.
>
> Joshua,
>
>   This does not work if the procmail recipe is for 
> pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> and the source includes the server; e.g, 
> pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org.
> Perhaps adding '.*' in front of postgresql.org will fix this.
>
> Rich
>

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Stephen Frost wrote:

> Yes, for a while both of those addresses will work and therefore you'd
> need to handle both addresses (there's a few different ways you could do
> that; with a regexp, I'd suggest something more specific, eg: (lists.)? ).

Stephen,
  Yes, I changed the postgresql recipes to have the lists prefix.

Thanks,

Rich

On 11/20/2017 09:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> This list has now been migrated to new mailing list software known as
> 'PGLister'.  This migration will impact all users of this mailing list
> in one way or another.

I note the conspicuous absence of pgsql-announce@postgresql.org in the
lists the Before email was sent to.  Can I assume that that list
continues under the old regime?

Ben
--
Ben Coleman  <b.coleman@accelerateddesign.com>
CTO, Accelerated Design, Inc.
(678) 337-8899

Ben Coleman <b.coleman@accelerateddesign.com> writes:
> On 11/20/2017 09:45 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> This list has now been migrated to new mailing list software known as
>> 'PGLister'.  This migration will impact all users of this mailing list
>> in one way or another.

> I note the conspicuous absence of pgsql-announce@postgresql.org in the
> lists the Before email was sent to.  Can I assume that that list
> continues under the old regime?

It's scheduled to be migrated next week.
        regards, tom lane

Kinda looking like you should have unsubscribed everybody and those of us that would miss the feed would re-connect.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Michael Nolan <htfoot@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:

This list has now been migrated to new mailing list software known as
'PGLister'.  This migration will impact all users of this mailing list
in one way or another.

Is there more information available about PGLister somewhere, ie, is this a list package that other people running mailing lists might be able to use?  A net search for "PGLister" doesn't find much yet.

Hi!

Please track the thread at https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevEw7Vs9Hpe-9dRWPwXDa4sPuE71BDNk2X8_UOQ%3Dhvf1tnA%40mail.gmail.com for information on that. TL/DR version is that right now it's in a closed repo, but it's scheduled to be opened as soon as somebody has had the time to go through it and make sure we're not accidentally leaking something that shouldn't be leaked. 

--

 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/

Mike,

* Michael Nolan (htfoot@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > This list has now been migrated to new mailing list software known as
> > 'PGLister'.  This migration will impact all users of this mailing list
> > in one way or another.
>
> Is there more information available about PGLister somewhere, ie, is this a
> list package that other people running mailing lists might be able to use?
> A net search for "PGLister" doesn't find much yet.

It's open source and we'll open the git tree for it soon, but it's tied
into our community authentication system, so it's not like it's
something that would be easy to plug-n-play elsewhere.

Thanks!

Stephen