[Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
38 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Palvelin Postmaster
Why does this list apparently use the original From header of the poster’s message and doesn't set a Reply-To header at all?

Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly and DMARC failures occur when posting to list. Not very elegant.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>Why does this list apparently use the original From header of the poster’s
> message and doesn't set a Reply-To header at all?

because it's the standard behaviour.

>Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly

get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.
This mailing lists sets headers required for list handling:

List-Post: <mailto:[hidden email]>

note that
1. there are cases when you want to reply personally
2. Reply-To: is supposed to be set by sending user, not someone in between.

>and DMARC failures occur when posting to list.

where you did get this feeling?

Those would happen if the list changed the original (or any DKIM-digned)
header, or set envelope sender to the original poster.

Neither does happen.
At least not unless someone configures outgoing MTA to DKIM-sign headers
that may change on the way (e.g. Received:)



--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [hidden email] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Alex Woick
In reply to this post by Palvelin Postmaster
Palvelin Postmaster schrieb am 30.05.2018 um 14:49:
> Why does this list apparently use the original From header of the poster’s message and doesn't set a Reply-To header at all?
>
> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly and DMARC failures occur when posting to list. Not very elegant.

I use Thunderbird, and for postings on this list, a "Reply list" button
appears in addition to the usual reply button. So I can reply to the
list only, to the list and cc to the poster, or to the poster only.
Messages also appear on this list without DMARC failures, because they
get mailfrom envelope address from the mailinglist software. It's all fine.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Palvelin Postmaster
In reply to this post by Matus UHLAR - fantomas


> On 30 May 2018, at 16:06, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>
>> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly
>
> get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.

I see, the 'Mozzilla or stfu' policy ;D


>> and DMARC failures occur when posting to list.
>
> where you did get this feeling?

I get these:

Authentication-Results: mailchk-m06.uwaterloo.ca;
        dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=palvelin.fi header.i=@palvelin.fi header.b="jkScMTCb"
Received: from mx-104.cs.uwaterloo.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by mx-104.cs.uwaterloo.ca (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-3) with ESMTPS id w4UCfMd0017123
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT)
        for <[hidden email]>; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:41:23 -0400
Received: (from arpepper@localhost)
        by mx-104.cs.uwaterloo.ca (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w4UCfMdf017105
        for [hidden email]; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:41:22 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: mx-104.cs.uwaterloo.ca: arpepper set sender to users-return-118335-arpepper=[hidden email] using -f
Received: from mailchk-m06.uwaterloo.ca (mailchk-m06.uwaterloo.ca [129.97.128.242])
        by mx-104.cs.uwaterloo.ca (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-3) with ESMTPS id w4UCfKNh017011
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT)
        for <[hidden email]>; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:41:20 -0400
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
        by mailchk-m06.uwaterloo.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with SMTP id w4UCfELi016200
        for <[hidden email]>; Wed, 30 May 2018 08:41:17 -0400
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mailchk-m06.uwaterloo.ca w4UCfELi016200
Authentication-Results: mailchk-m06/w4UCfELi016200; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=palvelin.fi
Authentication-Results: mailchk-m06; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=users-return-118335-arpepper=[hidden email]
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailchk-m06.uwaterloo.ca w4UCfELi016200
Received: (qmail 35995 invoked by uid 500); 30 May 2018 12:41:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact [hidden email]; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:[hidden email]>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:[hidden email]>
List-Post: <mailto:[hidden email]>
List-Id: <users.spamassassin.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list [hidden email]
Received: (qmail 35985 invoked by uid 99); 30 May 2018 12:41:12 -0000
Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142)
  by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 May 2018 12:41:12 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 949B31A3964
        for <[hidden email]>; Wed, 30 May 2018 12:41:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.3 at mailchk-m06
Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new);
        dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=palvelin.fi
Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8])
        by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
        with ESMTP id JzvfQbYYETXI for <[hidden email]>;
        Wed, 30 May 2018 12:41:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from palvelin.fi (posti.palvelin.fi [83.150.109.27])
        by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id AC16F5F41C
        for <[hidden email]>; Wed, 30 May 2018 12:41:09 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=palvelin.fi; h=from
        :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject
        :date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; s=posti; bh=qrKsgf7y
        rsJ0+f0QDK4L7U+3vAjhqmb1yo8CjtAWnnc=; b=jkScMTCbksH9eVaBvuIGeTUw
        sqmCcW4bY65Og4aOUpTqw9jH2PSgGhsxKf9Vkq0VV0kscmiOtVCAKWDajEWUjFhL
        Xf+R+qMkCtJaySGpkIQf4Q1cMP7pEG0+KX58D3tlzOAAua+cJhX70Wg7IwBaqQcq
        IZNRZRnEAjYZx+cIBE4=
Received: from [188.238.10.162] (account [hidden email] HELO dhcp76.vallden.com)
by palvelin.fi (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.4)
with ESMTPSA id 10162425 for [hidden email]; Wed, 30 May 2018 15:41:08 +0300
From: Palvelin Postmaster <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
Subject: Re: rewrite_header Subject and Bayes
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 15:41:07 +0300
References: <[hidden email]>
<[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
In-Reply-To: <[hidden email]>
Message-Id: <[hidden email]>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Antony Stone
On Wednesday 30 May 2018 at 15:33:13, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:

> > On 30 May 2018, at 16:06, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
> >> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly
> >
> > get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.
>
> I see, the 'Mozzilla or stfu' policy ;D

No, Mozilla was just one example; there are many.

I, for example, use KMail, and in the headers of your original posting in the
thread I see:

From: Palvelin Postmaster <[hidden email]>
List-Post: <mailto:[hidden email]>

There is no Reply-To header.

When I click on "Reply" my MUA automatically offers me
[hidden email]


Regards,


Antony.

--
Police have found a cartoonist dead in his house.  They say that details are
currently sketchy.

                                                   Please reply to the list;
                                                         please *don't* CC me.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Palvelin Postmaster


> On 30 May 2018, at 16:48, Antony Stone <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 30 May 2018 at 15:33:13, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>
>>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:06, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>>> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly
>>>
>>> get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.
>>
>> I see, the 'Mozzilla or stfu' policy ;D
>
> No, Mozilla was just one example; there are many.
>
> I, for example, use KMail

My Apple Mail/iPhone/iPad clients don’t. They all appear to be among Top 10 email clients (https://emailclientmarketshare.com).

I wonder if Gmail, Outlook variants and the Android mail clients do?


--
Palvelin.fi Hostmaster
[hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Bill Cole
On 30 May 2018, at 10:00, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:

>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:48, Antony Stone
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday 30 May 2018 at 15:33:13, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>
>>>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:06, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>>>> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly
>>>>
>>>> get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.
>>>
>>> I see, the 'Mozzilla or stfu' policy ;D
>>
>> No, Mozilla was just one example; there are many.
>>
>> I, for example, use KMail
>
> My Apple Mail/iPhone/iPad clients don’t. They all appear to be among
> Top 10 email clients (https://emailclientmarketshare.com).

Which is unfortunate, because Apple Mail generally sucks. It seems to
have been put under the control of people who think Outlook 2003 was the
pinnacle of email clients. For MacOS, there are far better alternatives
that include Mozilla and MailMate. For iOS not so much, sadly.

Any mail client that does not have an easy way to view messages in raw
RFC5322, to create messages that follow RFC3676, and to set Reply-To and
 From headers arbitrarily is unfit for use in the modern world no matter
how many people use it because switching is hard.

> I wonder if Gmail, Outlook variants and the Android mail clients do?

K9Mail for Android did, when last I used Android (many years ago.)
Modern Outlook on Windows does (or did, as of 2010.) I don't think I've
ever used the GMail web interface for anything beyond testing the GMail
web interface, so I can't speak to it as a MUA for mailing lists.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Bill Cole
In reply to this post by Palvelin Postmaster
On 30 May 2018, at 8:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:

> Why does this list apparently use the original From header of the
> poster’s message and doesn't set a Reply-To header at all?

1. Traditional standard practice. Doing otherwise in either case would
offend more people than sticking with the hands-off approach.

2. Inertia. For whatever reason, the choice was made in the misty past
to use qmail & ezmlm for Apache lists. These are de facto orphanware
programs that have licensing hostile to anyone seeking to adopt them.
Backporting features into old software takes work and testing, and no
one has seen it as worthwhile to do so for any DJB-ware as far as I
know.


> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly and DMARC failures
> occur when posting to list. Not very elegant.

Really? Not that I see:

> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=palvelin.fi; h=from
> :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject
> :message-id:date:to; s=posti; bh=nJX2juVBl5ckhxk/l1RP4IpkEFGPHhZ
> EKwAofBCnE/g=; b=BrKOw1EEdgBfVBxvpDLldyNXc5o2Cv0v6tIpSgK9roKd/4q
> cNQRljKNvc4PjZ94h7gbVFc3G0NzYs2vRMMywxAkMKUcBOhcZBRTb7S10qsWntPA
> vaLimWqfYph7zPrICAcFC92IwTv1JO2oRdIw9e11QOT0iB5mgKJLZ65DVjSQ=
> Received: from [188.238.10.162] (account [hidden email] HELO
> dhcp76.vallden.com)
>   by palvelin.fi (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.4)
>   with ESMTPSA id 10162444 for [hidden email]; Wed, 30
> May 2018 15:49:40 +0300
> From: Palvelin Postmaster <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
> Subject: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To
> Message-Id: <[hidden email]>
> Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 15:49:38 +0300
> To: [hidden email]
> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.18)
> X-Spam-Source: 140.211.0.0/16 on AS3701 via ** FI FI in en
> X-Spam-Hops: Trusted_** **FI FIFI X-Spam-Score: -22.21 ()
> AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SCC_DEBUG,SCC_DEBUG_RAW_LINE,SCC_DEBUG_WL,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL,USER_IN_SPF_WHITELIST,USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO

Note that changing the From header would break all DKIM signatures and
forcing a Reply-To would break many.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Bill Cole
In reply to this post by Bill Cole
On 30 May 2018, at 10:25, Bill Cole wrote:

> On 30 May 2018, at 10:00, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>
>>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:48, Antony Stone
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 30 May 2018 at 15:33:13, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:06, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>>>>> <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>>>>> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly
>>>>>
>>>>> get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.
>>>>
>>>> I see, the 'Mozzilla or stfu' policy ;D
>>>
>>> No, Mozilla was just one example; there are many.

Grumble. Not enough coffee.

Make that "Thunderbird (the Mozilla MUA)" rather than "Mozilla."
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Grant Taylor
In reply to this post by Bill Cole
On 05/30/2018 08:43 AM, Bill Cole wrote:
> Note that changing the From header would break all DKIM signatures and
> forcing a Reply-To would break many.

That's where validating & striping DKIM signatures as the message enters
the list comes into play.  Preferably followed up with DKIM signing as
messages exists the list.

Now to see what sort of DMARC notifications (if any) I get for this reply.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Grant Taylor
On 05/30/2018 09:34 AM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> Now to see what sort of DMARC notifications (if any) I get for this reply.

I have received four DMARC auth-failure notifications (thus far) in
response to my message to the SpamAssassin Users mailing list.

It looks like the reports are indicating that they consider the message
to have failed DMARC alignment tests because the From: header had my
domain name in a message did not originating from my servers.

Independent SPF and DKIM tests did pass.  The failure seems to be a
result of how DMARC amalgamates the two with published policies.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

RW-15
On Wed, 30 May 2018 11:45:12 -0600
Grant Taylor wrote:

> On 05/30/2018 09:34 AM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> > Now to see what sort of DMARC notifications (if any) I get for this
> > reply.  
>
> I have received four DMARC auth-failure notifications (thus far) in
> response to my message to the SpamAssassin Users mailing list.
>
> It looks like the reports are indicating that they consider the
> message to have failed DMARC alignment tests because the From: header
> had my domain name in a message did not originating from my servers.
>
> Independent SPF and DKIM tests did pass.  The failure seems to be a
> result of how DMARC amalgamates the two with published policies.

SPF passes on the rewritten envelope address, so it's not aligned and
it's just a matter of whether there's an aligned dkim pass.

It passes dmarc at gmail, so presumably the problem is with the service
that sent the notices.

The important thing is to not sign the list* headers in dkim.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Charles Sprickman
In reply to this post by Bill Cole

> On May 30, 2018, at 10:25 AM, Bill Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2018, at 10:00, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>
>>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:48, Antony Stone <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 30 May 2018 at 15:33:13, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On 30 May 2018, at 16:06, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 30.05.18 15:49, Palvelin Postmaster wrote:
>>>>>> Hitting reply sends the response to poster directly
>>>>>
>>>>> get a mail client that supports mailing lists. Mozilla should do.
>>>>
>>>> I see, the 'Mozzilla or stfu' policy ;D
>>>
>>> No, Mozilla was just one example; there are many.
>>>
>>> I, for example, use KMail
>>
>> My Apple Mail/iPhone/iPad clients don’t. They all appear to be among Top 10 email clients (https://emailclientmarketshare.com).
>
> Which is unfortunate, because Apple Mail generally sucks. It seems to have been put under the control of people who think Outlook 2003 was the pinnacle of email clients. For MacOS, there are far better alternatives that include Mozilla and MailMate. For iOS not so much, sadly.

All email clients “generally suck”.  Thunderbird is not even actively developed anymore last I checked, so that’s not really an option.  And if you can imagine this, both Thunderbird and MailMate choke on large mailboxes *even more* than Mail.app does.

If I had a better option than some old command-line mess, I’d use it.  Every 3-4 years I go on a hunt for a new Mac mail client and I always come up empty.  I’ve tried MailMate, Thunderbird, Postbox and just keep coming back to the (neglected) Mail.app.  I’m all ears if there’s something out there that can deal with 5 or 6 really large accounts well, AND does the right thing with mailing lists, I’m all ears.  I’ve not tried Outlook for Mac yet, maybe that’s the ticket? :)

Charles

ps - this email I’m replying to has a “Reply-To” header and Mail.app followed it.

>
> Any mail client that does not have an easy way to view messages in raw RFC5322, to create messages that follow RFC3676, and to set Reply-To and From headers arbitrarily is unfit for use in the modern world no matter how many people use it because switching is hard.
>
>> I wonder if Gmail, Outlook variants and the Android mail clients do?
>
> K9Mail for Android did, when last I used Android (many years ago.) Modern Outlook on Windows does (or did, as of 2010.) I don't think I've ever used the GMail web interface for anything beyond testing the GMail web interface, so I can't speak to it as a MUA for mailing lists.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Grant Taylor
In reply to this post by RW-15
On 05/30/2018 12:08 PM, RW wrote:
> SPF passes on the rewritten envelope address, so it's not aligned and
> it's just a matter of whether there's an aligned dkim pass.

It depends on what the Forensic Report ("fo") option is set to in the
published DMARC policy.  Domain owners / record publishers can state
that any failure, including SPF misalignment, will cause a report to be
sent.

IMHO simply relying on DKIM to validate is insufficient.

Further, it's not unheard of for something else (completely benign) to
break DKIM (like 8-bit to 7-bit MIME transcoding).

> It passes dmarc at gmail,

I've learned not to use Gmail as a measuring stick for what's good.
Rather I use Gmail as for the low end, as if it fails Gmail then it's
really broken.  Gmail has a number of things that are NOT up to a high bar.

> so presumably the problem is with the service that sent the notices.

How is it a misconfiguration / misbehavior of the receiving DMARC filter
for reporting a misalignment that it detected between the envelope from
and the From header?

That sounds like "working as (intended|desired|configured)" to me.

> The important thing is to not sign the list* headers in dkim.

I did say that DKIM passed.  Which means that the list-* headers didn't
cause the failure.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Grant Taylor
In reply to this post by Charles Sprickman
On 05/30/2018 12:47 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
> If I had a better option than some old command-line mess, I’d use it.
> Every 3-4 years I go on a hunt for a new Mac mail client and I always
> come up empty.  I’ve tried MailMate, Thunderbird, Postbox and just keep
> coming back to the (neglected) Mail.app.  I’m all ears if there’s
> something out there that can deal with 5 or 6 really large accounts well,
> AND does the right thing with mailing lists, I’m all ears.  I’ve not
> tried Outlook for Mac yet, maybe that’s the ticket?

I'd say that you can start looking at Eudora again in (I'm guessing) 6 ~
18 months.

Since Qualcom transferred the Eudora IP to the Computer History Museum
and open sourced the source code, I expect that we will be seeing
movement there in.  I think I've seen some references to projects to
resurrect the code base within days of the announcement.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die


smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Bill Cole
On 30 May 2018, at 14:51 (-0400), Grant Taylor wrote:

> Since Qualcom transferred the Eudora IP to the Computer History Museum and open sourced the source code, I expect that we will be seeing movement there in.  I think I've seen some references to projects to resurrect the code base within days of the announcement.

I wouldn't bet on a successful reanimation of the Eudora corpse for MacOS. My understanding from its developers at the time Qualcomm killed it in favor of re-skinning TBird (which also fizzled) is that the code was unmaintainable and required essentially a full rewrite to keep working on MacOS X given the ongoing rot in the Carbon APIs.


--
Bill Cole
[hidden email] or [hidden email]
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Currently Seeking Steadier Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole

signature.asc (334 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Luis E. Muñoz
On 30 May 2018, at 13:54, Bill Cole wrote:

> On 30 May 2018, at 14:51 (-0400), Grant Taylor wrote:
>
>> Since Qualcom transferred the Eudora IP to the Computer History
>> Museum and open sourced the source code, I expect that we will be
>> seeing movement there in.  I think I've seen some references to
>> projects to resurrect the code base within days of the announcement.
>
> I wouldn't bet on a successful reanimation of the Eudora corpse for
> MacOS. My understanding from its developers at the time Qualcomm
> killed it in favor of re-skinning TBird (which also fizzled) is that
> the code was unmaintainable and required essentially a full rewrite to
> keep working on MacOS X given the ongoing rot in the Carbon APIs.

Also, IIRC, messages were kept in mbox-like files. That would certainly
not scale well.

Best regards

-lem
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Bill Cole
In reply to this post by Charles Sprickman
On 30 May 2018, at 14:47 (-0400), Charles Sprickman wrote:

> All email clients “generally suck”.  Thunderbird is not even
> actively developed anymore last I checked,

Check again. That's not been true for quite a while. I just dusted off
TBird for the first time in 2 years and was treated to an update from
v39 to v52, in 4 steps because apparently the autoupdate couldn't do it
directly. 52.8.0 is 12 days old.

> so that’s not really an option.

That really depends on what "actively developed" means. I'd have no
problem at all using a MUA that was only maintained for security and bug
fixes, if it had basic functionality nailed down.

> And if you can imagine this, both Thunderbird and MailMate choke on
> large mailboxes *even more* than Mail.app does.

I haven't had MM "choke" on large mailboxes in recent years. I wish
Benny would just declare a 2.0 release to make it clear that MM today is
much more solid than it was in 2015.

--
Bill Cole
[hidden email] or [hidden email]
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Currently Seeking Steadier Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Luis E. Muñoz
On 30 May 2018, at 14:30, Bill Cole wrote:

> And if you can imagine this, both Thunderbird and MailMate choke on
> large mailboxes *even more* than Mail.app does.
>
>
> I haven't had MM "choke" on large mailboxes in recent years. I wish
> Benny would just declare a 2.0 release to make it clear that MM today
> is much more solid than it was in 2015.

To further the point, one of the mailboxes I manage on this box has 95K+
messages. Apple Mail would choke to dead on this one. MM seems happy. I
would give it another try as this is precisely the reason why I switched
~2 years ago.

Best regards

-lem
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Offtopic] List From and Reply-To

Bill Cole
In reply to this post by Luis E. Muñoz
On 30 May 2018, at 17:19 (-0400), Luis E. Muñoz wrote:

> On 30 May 2018, at 13:54, Bill Cole wrote:
>
>> On 30 May 2018, at 14:51 (-0400), Grant Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> Since Qualcom transferred the Eudora IP to the Computer History
>>> Museum and open sourced the source code, I expect that we will be
>>> seeing movement there in.  I think I've seen some references to
>>> projects to resurrect the code base within days of the announcement.
>>
>> I wouldn't bet on a successful reanimation of the Eudora corpse for
>> MacOS. My understanding from its developers at the time Qualcomm
>> killed it in favor of re-skinning TBird (which also fizzled) is that
>> the code was unmaintainable and required essentially a full rewrite
>> to keep working on MacOS X given the ongoing rot in the Carbon APIs.
>
> Also, IIRC, messages were kept in mbox-like files. That would
> certainly not scale well.

That's actually not a big issue, since they were mbox with an index in
the resource fork or a sibling file and so did not suffer from the
performance issues that simple mbox used simplistically has.

--
Bill Cole
[hidden email] or [hidden email]
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Currently Seeking Steadier Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole
12