Re: 1:2.1.29-1+deb10u5? Re: upgrade-in-place to Mailman 2.1.30 and want to test Mailman3?

The one key difference of relevance, at least that I can easily spot,
between 2.1.29 and 2.1.30 is:
there is now a dmarc_moderation_addresses
list setting that can be used to apply dmarc_moderation_action to mail
From: addresses listed or matching listed regexps. This can be used
to modify mail to addresses that don't accept external mail From:
themselves.
See: https://launchpad.net/mailman/2.1/2.1.30
Also, if we look at # of downloads, I'd guess a whole lot fewer folks
have used or are using 2.1.30 compared to 2.1.29
by almost 9:1 ratio (466 downloads for 2.1.30 vs. 4100 for 2.1.29). In
fact 2.1.34 and 2.1.39 are the only versions after 2.1.29 having >1000
downloads (with 2760 and 3054, respectively).

On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 12:03 PM Michael Paoli
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Will 1:2.1.29-1+deb10u5 suffice?  That's the latest (and fairly likely
> to be last) Debian version from the mailman 2.x series.
> That is also the version that's currently running on lists.balug.org
> and has been running there for quite a long time ... since at least
> 2022-08-11T01:16:18.162191795Z.
>
> Notes / See also:
> https://snapshot.debian.org/binary/mailman/
> https://lists.balug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/balug-test
> https://wiki.debian.org/LTS LTS support for Debian 10 continues
> through 2024-06-30
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 3:00 PM Local mailing list for the CABAL Linux
> user group. <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Local mailing list for the CABAL Linux user group. ([email protected]):
> >
> > [This was Ron in BC.]
> >
> > > I'm really feeling the nudge to set up a Mailman3 instance.
> >
> > I'm not.  But I've already clarified my views about Mailman3.
> > To my knowledge, Mailman3 and latter releases of Mailman 2.1.x
> > both have the same DMARC mitigation options.  (I have not lately
> > checked to see if Mailman3 has evolved further, but mostly because of
> > antipathy to the thing.  If you want to look into that question, it
> > might be interesting.
> >
> > > If I were to set up a test list or two in Mailman3, would you be
> > > interested in checking out the features?
> >
> > I don't want to seem ungrateful, but I'm not sure I should spare the
> > time.  There's a bunch of things that already need doing, and I'm not
> > sure what I'd learn from that, that has utility in my use-case --
> > unless there's some actual advantage.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > conspire mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire

_______________________________________________
conspire mailing list
[email protected]
http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/conspire