[bitfolk] Re: BitFolk's mailing lists have migrated to Mailman 3

HI Iain, On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 11:28:10PM +0100, Iain Lane via BitFolk Users wrote: This was because Exim on the lists host was set to queue emails after only 10 messages have been submitted in one connection - a default setting I wasn't aware of and hadn't hit in my testing. The queue check interval was also at its default, which is every 30 minutes.

So, a batch of emails went out, then there was a big delay before a batch more were sent, and some later ones (which got immediately sent, not queued), got delivered first. People who temporarily rejected the emails (greylisting) also got a much bigger delay due to multiple queue runs being needed. I've now rectified that by removing the 10 message limit and reducing the queue run frequency to 5 minutes. Thje re-ordering and extreme delays shouldn't happen again.

It has put your address in the To: because mails to this list ("users") are set to have full personalisation, i.e. some variable expansions are available that relate to each individual subscriber. The most useful of these is being able to put in the footer which address you are subscribed under. However, even though I thought I had set that (and it works on my test list), that footer doesn't seem to have been used this time. I'm unsure why and will have to look into that. It's supposed to look like this: _______________________________________________ $display_name mailing list <$listname> You're subscribed as <$user_email> Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.bitfolk.com/mailman/postorius/lists/$list_id/> or send an email to <${short_listname}-leave@${domain}> If that is deemed not particularly useful then I can turn off full personalisation and the behaviour would go back to saying: To: BitFolk Users &lt;users(a)mailman.bitfolk.com&gt; Do people prefer that enough to get rid of the subscriber address in footer? It is quite common for people to forget under which email address they have subscribed, and not know how to find that in the headers, and then be unable to unsubscribe or log in to Mailman. They sometimes end up trying to unsubscribe addresses that aren't subscribed, or even subscribing again under a new address, thinking that this is what is required. Yeah, it can't. It's either "list doesn't add a Reply-To:" or "list adds its own to whatever is there already, if any". Very few people were actually subscribed to "users-replyto" so it could be argued that very few actually want the Reply-To: set, but in conversation I actually think it's the case that most people were just putting up with it not being set because they couldn't be bothered to join the other list. However, if there is a clear preference for not setting the Reply-To: then I will revert that, and that would also allow any user supplied Reply-To: to be the only one. So if you are not particularly bothered either way about the list adding its own Reply-To:, you might still be against it for the other reason. What are your thoughts? Thanks, Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

_______________________________________________ BitFolk Users mailing list -- users(a)mailman.bitfolk.com To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)mailman.bitfolk.com