Re: Mangled and non-mangled TUHS mail lists

Dave Horsfall <dave(a)horsfall.org> wrote: |On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Grant Taylor wrote: |> You might consider a filter that will filter messages (to trash so it's |> recoverable?) to you and to the list. That way you would rely on \ |> the list |> copy. (But you could fetch the message out of trash if you needed to.) | |Yeah, I did use a Procmail filter for that, but Procmail is dead. I must |take a closer look at Sieve. The BSD Mail clone i maintain can perform simple filtering, too. Gunnar Ritter implemented IMAP-style search expressions. We are far from being so powerful as mutt regarding filtering, but i think automatization should work a bit better already today. Because TUHS changed its policy i have added :Ll colon modifiers to search for mailing-lists which are known (`mlist') or subscribed (`mlsubscribe') just yesterday. This is not on [master] yet but just works (true for the [next] branch as of today as such). E.g., $ printf 'File+download\nmove :Ll +lists\nxit' | s-nail -# It is a bit of a pity, since almost all MLs really worth reading use this tagging (e.g., ih, leapsecs, tz, the security lists, groff, as well as pcc and tinycc-devel, to name a few). And DKIM is no problem at all if you use G....e groups over HTTPS and give the business some opportunities to actually make some of the money necessary to drive the environment you use, HEH??? DKIM should have been designed to create DKIM envelopes, so that lists could simply create an encapsulating DKIM layer, and all would be fine. But it has not, evil to him who evil thinks, the future is bright, isn't it. I for one admire those old standards which worked for a few dozen boxes and still scale further on. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)