MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3uF7AfcH__zHjSUt=RWXG4RfPup=zwnLf_G1_1_oMvmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEz79Pp_6FhDjtR6emBcXf_WT14MbDaTxMbeAo=QAfhS-ihFCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP3uF7AfcH__zHjSUt=RWXG4RfPup=zwnLf_G1_1_oMvmA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:45:38 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFVoEQQvs2e8qNDudNb_10UAHfkMEN5JDhG4HaD4Q-CvCKncHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Weiss <adam@signal11.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ba98ec64a11051893b3d0
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Move Bitcoin Dev List to a
 Neutral Competent Entity
Precedence: list

--001a113ba98ec64a11051893b3d0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Recent versions of mailman strip DKIM signatures, rewrite the envelope-from
to use an address at the list's domain and set reply-to to the original
authors address to resolve the DMARC issue.  I'm on several lists that do
this and it works just fine.

+1 on moving the list.  Given the fact that the mails are archived in
public, it's not really a huge deal how it takes place.  One month sounds
reasonable (although I think it could be done on a shorter timescale).  I'd
setup the new list to allow subscriptions, but keep it moderated to keep
discussion from moving until the cut, send lots of warnings and then on the
big day unmoderate one and moderate the other.

It's a great opportunity to hardfork something in Bitcoin without risk of
breakage, losses or entertaining melodrama. : )

--adam

ps. I think SF will let project admins download mbox archives of the list,
the new admins should be able to import them to keep archive consistency in
one place.


On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:

> Bear in mind the problem that stops Jeff's messages getting through is
> that mailman 1.0 doesn't know how to handle DKIM properly. Switching to a
> different mailman provider won't fix that.
>
> Does mailman 3.0 even fix this? I found it difficult to tell from their
> website. There's a big page on the mailman wiki that suggests they "fixed"
> it by simply deleting the signatures entirely, which won't work. DMARC
> policies state that mail *must* be signed and unsigned/incorrectly signed
> message should be discarded.
>
> The user documentation for mailman 3 doesn't seem to exist? The links on
> the website are docs for 2.1, perhaps they released mailman 3 without
> refreshing the docs.
>
> Google Groups may be "controversial" but if I recall correctly the main
> issue was the question of whether you needed a Google account or not. I'm
> pretty sure you can just send an email to
> groupname+subscribe@googlegroups.com even if you don't have a Google
> account. But of course this is a bizarre standard to hold mailing list
> software to: mailman asks users to create an account for each listserv in
> order to manage a subscription too!
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>

--001a113ba98ec64a11051893b3d0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Recent versions of mailman strip DKIM signatures, rew=
rite the envelope-from to use an address at the list&#39;s domain and set r=
eply-to to the original authors address to resolve the DMARC issue.=C2=A0 I=
&#39;m on several lists that do this and it works just fine.<br></div><div>=
<br></div><div>+1 on moving the list.=C2=A0 Given the fact that the mails a=
re archived in public, it&#39;s not really a huge deal how it takes place.=
=C2=A0 One month sounds reasonable (although I think it could be done on a =
shorter timescale).=C2=A0 I&#39;d setup the new list to allow subscriptions=
, but keep it moderated to keep discussion from moving until the cut, send =
lots of warnings and then on the big day unmoderate one and moderate the ot=
her.</div><div><br></div><div>It&#39;s a great opportunity to hardfork some=
thing in Bitcoin without risk of breakage, losses or entertaining melodrama=
. : )</div><div><br></div><div>--adam</div><div><br></div><div>ps. I think =
SF will let project admins download mbox archives of the list, the new admi=
ns should be able to import them to keep archive consistency in one place.<=
/div><div><br></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmai=
l_quote">On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;=
<a href=3D"mailto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a>&gt=
;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_extra">Bear in mind the problem that stops Jeff&#39;s messages =
getting through is that mailman 1.0 doesn&#39;t know how to handle DKIM pro=
perly. Switching to a different mailman provider won&#39;t fix that.</div><=
div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Does mailman=
 3.0 even fix this? I found it difficult to tell from their website. There&=
#39;s a big page on the mailman wiki that suggests they &quot;fixed&quot; i=
t by simply deleting the signatures entirely, which won&#39;t work. DMARC p=
olicies state that mail <i>must</i>=C2=A0be signed and unsigned/incorrectly=
 signed message should be discarded.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></=
div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">The user documentation for mailman 3 doesn&#=
39;t seem to exist? The links on the website are docs for 2.1, perhaps they=
 released mailman 3 without refreshing the docs.</div><div class=3D"gmail_e=
xtra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Google Groups may be &quot;contr=
oversial&quot; but if I recall correctly the main issue was the question of=
 whether you needed a Google account or not. I&#39;m pretty sure you can ju=
st send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:groupname%2Bsubscribe@googlegroups.co=
m" target=3D"_blank">groupname+subscribe@googlegroups.com</a> even if you d=
on&#39;t have a Google account. But of course this is a bizarre standard to=
 hold mailing list software to: mailman asks users to create an account for=
 each listserv in order to manage a subscription too!</div><div class=3D"gm=
ail_extra"><br></div></div>
<br>-----------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/=
listinfo/bitcoin-development</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a113ba98ec64a11051893b3d0--