both gentoo-dev@lists.g.o and @g.o work, but the List-Post header is set to @g.o even if the message was addressed to @lists.g.o. This causes KMail (KDE 3.2) to send replies to both @g.o and @lists.g.o. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
Cybersystem\lcars: Can you take care of this? (not sure if its still happening)
Well I'd like to consider this a KMail problem and not an issue of our setup. It's correct to specify List-Post to @g.o, that's intentional because we want to be neutral against the mailing list domain. Could someone test if kmail could be configured for preventing this or if the latest version fixes this problem?
Reply to Mailing List (default) works, but Reply to All (which most mail programs have and is, on occasion, useful to address both the individual and the list) does not. The proper action for Reply to All when To: is different from List-Post is to send to both of them, so this is a bug in the mailing list setup.
Reply to all works perfectly with mutt, I'm sorry but having a Reply-To header is definetly NOT a bug in the ml setup.
I don't see where the Reply-To header comes into the picture... I don't see it in any of my emails from the list. The problem is that the 'To' header address is *different* from the one in 'List-Post'
Sorry, s/Reply-to/List-Post ;) I was referring to that. (there's another similiar bug about Reply-To so that's why I got confiused sorry). Anyway as I said that header is supposed to be there and it's expected to be different from To: that's the whole point of the header, to manage ml situations like ours where we have @gentoo.org rewritten to other domains. Kmail is wrong in this instance, I'll wait other comments, personally I don't think we should fix this and anyway it's hard to do.
Where do you get the idea that 'To' should be different from 'List-Post'? From what I can see, 'List-Post' is there to inform the mail client of the proper address posts should be sent to. KMail uses this very well to support "New Message to Mailing List" when in a mailing list folder and for the "Reply to Mailing List" function.
If List-Post was always meant to be the same as To there wouldn't be any point in having it now would there?
Exactly, List-Post is meant to be there because it CAN be different from To:, and that's our situation. It's not the ml problem if kmail is being dumb with those header, just disable List-Id|Post parsing if you can for preventing your MUA problems.
Indeed, it is possible for a list posting to be a blind carbon copy, in which case the List-Post would not be anywhere in the To/CC list. However, List-Post is the *only* header that can be used to determine what address to send ML replies to. Remove/disable it and you can only Reply to Author (original sender) or Reply to All (which goes to not only the mailing list, but the original sender, and any other people/lists mentioned in the To/CC headers).
Well then change MUA my friend or live with that necessary evil. I'll keep this open for 24 hours for further comments, I keep beleiving that kmail is obviously in error and not our ml setup. Besides you just confirmed that List-Post can't be set like To: for obvious reasons, so this "problem" is not even fixeable.
AFAIK the gentoo mailing lists are setup so that the listnames have to be present in the To: or Cc: header og the mail will be rejected. But why don't you just configure KMail yourself instead of relying on it inter- preting mail headers wrongly in this case with this setup?
KMail is setup for mailing lists once. The problem is that there is no static email used for the list, but 3 or 4 possibilities anyone can use. Maybe the solution is to restrict the ML to accept mail only addressed to its official address or to reformat non-standard ML addresses to the official one in To/CC.
Valid addresses are listname@gentoo.org, listname@lists.gentoo.org and listname@robin.gentoo.org In the future listname@robin.gentoo.org will be removed. Right now enforcing one address is a really bad idea for a lot of complicated reasons and anyway it's not what we would like at the end. Reformatting is not an option.
RFC 2369: "A list of multiple, alternate, URLs MAY be specified by a comma-separated list of angle-bracket enclosed URLs. The URLs have order of preference from left to right. The client application should use the left most protocol that it supports, or knows how to access by a separate application. By this mechanism, protocols like http may be specified while still providing the basic mailto support for those clients who do not have access to non-mail protocols. The client should only use one of the available URLs for a command, using another only if the first one used failed." KMail supports this for list detection, though it does bug for Reply to All. According to the language in the RFC, any mail client *not* supporting multiple URIs would be in violation, but it might be worth testing them anyway.... so if anyone has another mail client supporting List-* headers, please test it. I can confirm that neither Thunderbird nor SquirrelMail support List-* headers at all, so they, at least, are not an issue.
A test message to test this with: List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org>, <mailto:gentoo-amd64@robin.gentoo.org>, <mailto:gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org> To: gentoo-amd64@robin.gentoo.org From: ______ Subject: testing check list-post and such (this is the body of the message :)
I have filed a bug regarding KMail's incorrect handling of multiple List-Post addresses when composing a new post. Once KMail's bug is fixed and Gentoo's MLs list all valid posting addresses, the problem should be resolved. http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99989
This problem exists with mail-client/evolution-2.0.2-r1. I've never seen any other mailing list setting different List-Post.
Okay, this is what I think is happening... * User hits Reply All -- the client "helpfully" fills in the addresses: To: ${LIST}@gentoo.org CC: ${LIST}@list.gentoo.org then the user fills in subject, message -- perhaps attaches some files, and clicks Send * Mail client passes it on to the user's ISP's mail server (or a local one in my case) -- which then passes the email on to Gentoo. (It might even duplicate it at this point) * Gentoo's SMTP server receives the message and delivers 2 copies of the message to the local user (actually a program -- ezmlm): - One goes to ${LIST}@gentoo.org - One goes to ${LIST}@lists.gentoo.org * Mailing list software sees two copies of the same message, but treats them as separate messages, therefore passing on the duplicates. The easiest way to fix this is to tell people to check who their message is addressed to first -- but some server-side magic would be great too. Perhaps do an MD5SUM of its content, then compare with the last few sent messages to a list? -- reject if MD5SUMs match?
Perhaps just refrain from setting List-Post to something different than the actual list address?
The main problem is that there are 3 "official" list posting addresses and the list server is only listing one of them in List-Post, so the clients think that LIST@lists.gentoo.org and LIST@robin.gentoo.org are *not* the mailing list addresses. Therefore, logically, they should be CC'd to the new message. If all three addresses were listed in List-Post, then it would work properly *in theory*. Currently, with KMail at least, the problem persists even with proper headers, but I have reported a bug to KMail regarding this problem so hopefully it will be fixed soon. If checksumming is to be used on the server, you might need to be careful what is included in the data checksummed... I'm not sure all the headers would be the same. Another idea would simply be keeping track of recent Message IDs and comparing against them. I think those would match for dupes...
Recent message IDs would also affect cross-posts.
No more than MD5 comparisons would. Just keep the recent-posts lists on a per-mailing-list basis.
Ok, the MD5 proposal is completely out of the question due to the fact that is simply technically impossible and honestly not a "sensible" thing to do. There are 3 legal addresses right now and until our migration attempt is completed we cannot force one of those, all 3 should remain and people should use @gentoo.org anyway. List-Post IS supposed to be different from To: in some scenarios, period. (Otherwise why an additional header if it should be always equal to To:) I'll be happy to use multiple List-Post if I get a detailed report about all major MUA multiple List-Post handling. In the meantime this continues to be a MUA/users problem imho and not a bug in the ml setup. People should start using the mailing lists related features of their mail client apps or anyway look at the screen before hitting send :/. I'm open to all suggestions.
Indeed, List-Post isn't supposed to be To. Here's a bunch of valid To fields when List-Post is L@gentoo.org: To: luke-jr@utopios.org, L@gentoo.org, otherguy@there.net To: L@gentoo.org To: L@gentoo.org, lcars@gentoo.org To: brix@gentoo.org; CC: L@gentoo.org To: lcars@gentoo.org, brix@gentoo.org; (BCC: L@gentoo.org) However, changing L@gentoo.org in any of the above to L@lists.gentoo.org when L@lists.gentoo.org implies that L@gentoo.org is on a BCC list and L@lists.gentoo.org is an *additional* destination for the message. Thus, the proper thing for a MUA/user to do is to include L@lists.gentoo.org in addition to L@gentoo.org when they Reply to All
Honestly, what is so hard for you people to grasp? You just have to learn how to use your mail client! :) "Reply to List" or an equivalent feature is available in all maintained/modern clients that I've used, if yours doesn't have it, switch to one that does or if you just can't deal with changing your client, manually change your To/CC/BCC before sending and let the rest of us who do know how to use e-mail get on with our lives. pvdabeel: this means you! I'm tired of seeing double on your -core mails :) This is not a bug with regards to the mailing list configuration, this is a bug that occurs between the user and the keyboard. luke-jr: doing duplicate removal of e-mails is so involved and ridiculously expensive resource-wise, not to mention inaccurate, that to implement such an idea would be entirely unfeasible...I know, I've tried to eliminate cross posts before...I still haven't discovered a perfect method.
blackace: I didn't suggest the idea of removing dupes at the server, just suggested that if it be done, use the message ID instead a MD5 hash. This *is* a bug with the mailing list configuration. No, it shouldn't occur with normal Reply-to-List posts, but sometimes Reply-to-All *is* what the user wants to do. If the mailing list was configured to send the proper List-Post header, this problem would be the fault of the client, but as it is right now, the List-Post header is lacking all valid posting methods as it should contain.
luke-jr: you're right, stuart proposed that, my apologies, although the message-id changes and is unsuitable for duplicate detection. Also, that RFC quote is taken out of context, this from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2369.txt is the whole and total description of the List-Post header: 3.4. List-Post The List-Post field describes the method for posting to the list. This is typically the address of the list, but MAY be a moderator, or potentially some other form of submission. For the special case of a list that does not allow posting (e.g., an announcements list), the List-Post field may contain the special value "NO". Examples: List-Post: <mailto:list@host.com> List-Post: <mailto:moderator@host.com> (Postings are Moderated) List-Post: <mailto:moderator@host.com?subject=list%20posting> List-Post: NO (posting not allowed on this list) Note: "the" method, not "methods", "and", "also", etc., nowhere does the RFC mention multiple methods being allowed in List-Post. Not a bug.
When, then, is being described where multiple/alternate URLs can be specified? The RFC only seems to be defining the "additional header fields to be added to email messages sent by email distribution lists". The term "command" appears to be defined as the contents of these headers in the Introduction, and the multiple/alternate quote is from section 2: "The Command Syntax". Certainly seems to be talking about the headers. What purpose would there be to defining a method for multiple addresses if they weren't allowed? Instead of nitpicking over the plurality (or lack thereof) of certain terms later on, maybe the singularity should be considered as the mindset that most lists will only have a single method for posting.
Well it seems to me that this behaviour has changed in some way recently, it seems tied in with the change to robin. My mail clients seem to be coping ok but it seems thunderbird and kmail do not. The problem is that there seems to be a lot of increased traffic that results. Anecdotally it seems about 1 in 3 or 4 posts to the list is duplicated, effectively sent twice. Thats an increase of between 33% and 25%. Its not only annoying, but also bandwidth consuming. It only seems to occur on gentoo.org mailing lists, and not any others. Are we to believe that gentoo.org has their mailing lists set up right, and everyone else has a different (and therefore wrong) setup? While at the same time g.o lists are the only ones where I see this behaviour? And are we also to believe that both thunderbird _and_ kmail have the wrong behaviour? Anyway, no matter what is strictly and technically right or wrong, its unusual and annoying behaviour and should be set back to the way it was before (IMHO). Thanks.
Changed List-Post with all available addresses, please report any feedback about this change here.
Where was the change made? It doesn't seem to be affecting -dev or -amd64 lists...
Right, the change was only made on gentoo-user, doing gentoo-dev in a few minutes.
Is there any kind of positive/negative feedback about the change I've made on List-Post?
It doesn't change anything wrt mail-client/evolution-2.0.3-r2.
Is there any mailing list handling option in evolution? Like reply to list? Are you using that feature?
Argh, sorry - I must have hit reply-to-all instead of reply-to-list. With reply-to-list it works now.
Hi, I am using kmail and did not any double-posts so far. So I think it is a user fault. Somehow, someone hits the wrong button/selects the wrong function, but that is not kmails fault. If you just hit the reply button, you will send one (1) mail to the list. And with 'reply to list' one single mail is send too.
Did you try "Reply to All" which would actually cause the issue? Also, since the headers are fixed on some lists now, it shouldn't be a problem.
Hi, when I select 'reply to all' it wants to send to @gentoo and to @robin.gentoo and the author of the original post.
The lists.gentoo.org has been moved and headers have changed accordingly. I'm considering this issue solved. Please reopen if necessary.
