On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:59:04AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Gerrit Pape <pape@smarden.org> writes: > > I can't help, I don't understand. I yesterday followed up to a mail > > that was additionally addressed to the <debian-ctte@lists.debian.org> > > mailing list and got an automatic reply telling me that the mail cannot > > be delivered because I'm not subscribed. Not a bounce, but an automatic > > reply to the address in the From: header, not the envelope sender > > address. How do you call this? > Surprising. As a CTTE member, I'd prefer to change that to have the same > mailing list policy as all the other Debian mailing lists, and am willing > to put up with the small amount of spam that makes it through the list > filtering. I thought it already was. The debian-ctte list is a historically special case. I don't believe that it should be; I'm on plenty of other Debian mailing lists and find the common spam filtering more than adequate. But I know that Ian has strong opinions on mail configuration, so we should be sure we have a consensus among the TC before making a change here. As a workaround for those trying to send mail to the TC, here is what I understand is *supposed* to be the debian-ctte posting policy: - mail sent via the BTS is accepted - mail sent by list subscribers is accepted - mail with a valid PGP signature is accepted - all other mail is rejected This has been the stated policy in the past; if it has changed since then, it was done so without discussion on the debian-ctte mailing list, so I would consider any divergence a bug. (Which would not be surprising, as this is the only Debian list with so complex of a posting policy, and there have been implementation bugs in the past.) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature