-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
All,
The main pearsoncomputing.net Email server (which also hosts the TDE mailing lists) will be going down for scheduled maintenance shortly (11/06/2014 16:00 GMT). Estimated termination of scheduled maintenance is 11/07/2014 05:00 GMT.
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
The list software interfaces will not be changing, and no list archives will be lost.
Thank you for your patience!
Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
All,
The main pearsoncomputing.net Email server (which also hosts the TDE mailing lists) will be going down for scheduled maintenance shortly (11/06/2014 16:00 GMT). Estimated termination of scheduled maintenance is 11/07/2014 05:00 GMT.
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
The list software interfaces will not be changing, and no list archives will be lost.
Thank you for your patience!
Tim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iFYEARELAAYFAlRbly8ACgkQLaxZSoRZrGHflgDfc/WclRk7XTAylnLxo926SnLi WyUaBzLVejjdiQDePhDkD1N6xOGC5fGnlRyO7s29RUB1qZedO8tNtQ== =zKt9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
On Saturday 08 November 2014 13:03:42 Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
Apparently not !
Thanks Andrew. :-) At least it made the list...
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
Tim
On Saturday 08 November 2014 04:00:46 pm Timothy Pearson wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
Tim
I'm using Yahoo email through Kmail. I *used* to see my own posts, but haven't in a long time.
Andy
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-08 15:00 (UTC-0600):
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
No apparent help WRT Earthlink. I send to trinity-users-subscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net from mrmazda@earthlink.net 35 minutes ago and have gotten no response.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-08 15:00 (UTC-0600):
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
No apparent help WRT Earthlink. I send to trinity-users-subscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net from mrmazda@earthlink.net 35 minutes ago and have gotten no response.
Thank you for the update. I now have some useful information in my server logs from your last attempt; let me see what I can do to fix this (Earthlink is explicitly blocking my mail server with error 550).
Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-08 15:00 (UTC-0600):
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
No apparent help WRT Earthlink. I send to trinity-users-subscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net from mrmazda@earthlink.net 35 minutes ago and have gotten no response.
Thank you for the update. I now have some useful information in my server logs from your last attempt; let me see what I can do to fix this (Earthlink is explicitly blocking my mail server with error 550).
Tim
Earthlink claims to have dealt with the problem; please try again?
Thanks!
Tim
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-08 17:18 (UTC-0600):
(Earthlink is explicitly blocking my mail server with error 550).
Earthlink claims to have dealt with the problem; please try again?
Latest attempt claims to have succeeded! :-D
Next up, please improve the mailing list archive usability. What I see: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411.png
Proposed fix: --- style1.css 2006-06-10 05:36:12.000000000 -0400 +++ style.css 2014-10-19 03:46:47.000000000 -0400 @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ }
a { color: #990000; } -pre { font-family: Monaco, Courier; font-size: 10px } +pre { font-family: Monaco, Courier } pre, iframe { margin-top: 20px }
a:hover @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ text-align: left; width: 80%; min-width: 550px; - max-width: 750px; + max-width: 46.75em; background-color: white; padding: 15px; margin: 25px auto 25px auto;
On 11/08/2014 04:50 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Next up, please improve the mailing list archive usability. What I see: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411.png
Proposed fix: [bunch of css stuff snipped]
...or not. Your screen image looks perfectly readable to me. Better to keep the archive simple, fast, and easily usable by everyone, than to add complications that may cause problems for others.
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 05:17:43AM -0800, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 11/08/2014 04:50 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Next up, please improve the mailing list archive usability. What I see: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411.png
Proposed fix: [bunch of css stuff snipped]
...or not. Your screen image looks perfectly readable to me. Better to keep the archive simple, fast, and easily usable by everyone, than to add complications that may cause problems for others.
When you say "easily usable by everyone", do you mean "everyone with perfect 20/20 vision"? Websites should honour the user's choice of typeface and typesize, if nothing else, and that doesn't add much in the way of complexity. (If anything, websites that force their own choice of font are more complex, not less.)
On Sunday 09 November 2014 13:31:19 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 05:17:43AM -0800, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 11/08/2014 04:50 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Next up, please improve the mailing list archive usability. What I see: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411.png
Proposed fix: [bunch of css stuff snipped]
...or not. Your screen image looks perfectly readable to me. Better to keep the archive simple, fast, and easily usable by everyone, than to add complications that may cause problems for others.
When you say "easily usable by everyone", do you mean "everyone with perfect 20/20 vision"? Websites should honour the user's choice of typeface and typesize, if nothing else, and that doesn't add much in the way of complexity. (If anything, websites that force their own choice of font are more complex, not less.)
I have poor sight, and I find the TDE archives *significantly* better than most, which I fond unusable. In fact, I can't see a problem. They are great. Beautifully clear and highly legible when I enlarge (ctrl-+) which I expect to do anyway. Most archives are awful and I can hardly read them. I have attached a screenshot of what I see. I don't know whether it will get through.
Lisi
Lisi Reisz composed on 2014-11-12 17:03 (UTC-0500):
On 11/08/2014 04:50 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
I have poor sight, and I find the TDE archives *significantly* better than most, which I fond unusable. In fact, I can't see a problem. They are great. Beautifully clear and highly legible when I enlarge (ctrl-+) which I expect to do anyway. Most archives are awful and I can hardly read them. I have attached a screenshot of what I see.
What you see, and provided in your attached binary, tells us little, in contrast to the screenshot URL I provided. In mine, the viewer can see what the browser's default size is, and what the whole array of DE sizes are, so that the fonts in the web page can be see in the context of both the defaults, and the whole rest of the desktop. It could be reproduced by anyone who wished to, because context is adequate. The only thing it lacks is actual zoom level applied, which Firefox doesn't offer. The zoom level in fact is none (100% of the size dictated by page CSS), so the archive page is in fact displaying the 10px size dictated by the page's CSS.
Your page provides only one context: the UI text in your browser. That frame of reference indicates you've applied several zoom levels to the page. Firefox by default remembers zoom levels by domain, so once you've been there and applied zoom, you shouldn't need to do it again until the site is restyled to use different sizes. The way the shot cuts off the top of the page, if negects to show the vast difference in font size between the "beautifully clear and highly legible" body fonts and the zoomed to gigantic page title fonts. If you revisit the page in a new browser with a new profile, or the same browser with a new profile, or reset the zoom level to none (Ctrl-0), you'll find the resulting fonts not so "beautifully clear and highly legible", probably to a size smaller than your tiny Firefox UI menu fonts.
Browser zoom is a *defense* mechanism. Defenses are only needed in the context of offensive behavior. In the instant case, the offensive behavior is web page font sizing that *completely* disregards the optimum size pre-defined via the visitors' browser default size settings. It may be acceptable to people who only use one computer and one DE to have to ever apply zoom on any given page or domain, but they shouldn't have to. Those who use a lot of DEs and a lot of browsers won't have the luxury of having been to any every frequented page before and having zoom level remembered. There's no good reason for anyone to have had to apply zoom ever in the first place. Web pages don't need to be rude, as their creators do have tools that enable them to embrace user defaults to get the results they want. The instant case if it remains as it is will remain particularly perplexing, as the TDE main site CSS is one of the very unfortunately few places on web where rude styling is not in place, in stark contrast its mailing list archive.
Fine. But I can see it. Most archives are virtually inaccessible to me. I like being able to see it, and regard it as a strength of the archives that they make it possible.
Lisi On Wednesday 12 November 2014 23:00:57 Felix Miata wrote:
Lisi Reisz composed on 2014-11-12 17:03 (UTC-0500):
On 11/08/2014 04:50 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
I have poor sight, and I find the TDE archives *significantly* better than most, which I fond unusable. In fact, I can't see a problem. They are great. Beautifully clear and highly legible when I enlarge (ctrl-+) which I expect to do anyway. Most archives are awful and I can hardly read them. I have attached a screenshot of what I see.
What you see, and provided in your attached binary, tells us little, in contrast to the screenshot URL I provided. In mine, the viewer can see what the browser's default size is, and what the whole array of DE sizes are, so that the fonts in the web page can be see in the context of both the defaults, and the whole rest of the desktop. It could be reproduced by anyone who wished to, because context is adequate. The only thing it lacks is actual zoom level applied, which Firefox doesn't offer. The zoom level in fact is none (100% of the size dictated by page CSS), so the archive page is in fact displaying the 10px size dictated by the page's CSS.
Your page provides only one context: the UI text in your browser. That frame of reference indicates you've applied several zoom levels to the page. Firefox by default remembers zoom levels by domain, so once you've been there and applied zoom, you shouldn't need to do it again until the site is restyled to use different sizes. The way the shot cuts off the top of the page, if negects to show the vast difference in font size between the "beautifully clear and highly legible" body fonts and the zoomed to gigantic page title fonts. If you revisit the page in a new browser with a new profile, or the same browser with a new profile, or reset the zoom level to none (Ctrl-0), you'll find the resulting fonts not so "beautifully clear and highly legible", probably to a size smaller than your tiny Firefox UI menu fonts.
Browser zoom is a *defense* mechanism. Defenses are only needed in the context of offensive behavior. In the instant case, the offensive behavior is web page font sizing that *completely* disregards the optimum size pre-defined via the visitors' browser default size settings. It may be acceptable to people who only use one computer and one DE to have to ever apply zoom on any given page or domain, but they shouldn't have to. Those who use a lot of DEs and a lot of browsers won't have the luxury of having been to any every frequented page before and having zoom level remembered. There's no good reason for anyone to have had to apply zoom ever in the first place. Web pages don't need to be rude, as their creators do have tools that enable them to embrace user defaults to get the results they want. The instant case if it remains as it is will remain particularly perplexing, as the TDE main site CSS is one of the very unfortunately few places on web where rude styling is not in place, in stark contrast its mailing list archive.
@Lisi, I think Felix is trying to say that the only reason it is, as you say "Beautifully clear and highly legible" is because you use zoom. If you didn't use zoom then it would not be "Beautifully clear and highly legible". The real point in this is, not the css etc or the pixel setting but rather, the fact you use zoom in this but not in others.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
@Lisi, I think Felix is trying to say that the only reason it is, as you say "Beautifully clear and highly legible" is because you use zoom. If you didn't use zoom then it would not be "Beautifully clear and highly legible". The real point in this is, not the css etc or the pixel setting but rather, the fact you use zoom in this but not in others.
I should cut this off right here and say that I will be fixing the tiny text problem; the default is way too small and increasing it won't change the way Lisi and others use the archive at all. I just haven't had time to dig around in the ezmlm source and fix it yet. :-)
Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
@Lisi, I think Felix is trying to say that the only reason it is, as you say "Beautifully clear and highly legible" is because you use zoom. If you didn't use zoom then it would not be "Beautifully clear and highly legible". The real point in this is, not the css etc or the pixel setting but rather, the fact you use zoom in this but not in others.
I should cut this off right here and say that I will be fixing the tiny text problem; the default is way too small and increasing it won't change the way Lisi and others use the archive at all. I just haven't had time to dig around in the ezmlm source and fix it yet. :-)
Tim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iFYEARELAAYFAlRj9YIACgkQLaxZSoRZrGE2/wDfRZcjptqItyaYoeV1BgoCM0vn XcbnYRfjpd/MTADePExAAD3V37USQEkP5FvaFStxRv5dvNqhSVlfBg== =5F2k -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
List archive updated. Any further suggestions?
Thanks!
Tim
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-12 20:14 (UTC-0600):
Any further suggestions?
Little new. :-(
Better, but:
1-Spindly, worst looking "common" monospace font I've ever seen, Courier, is still what it's using, since Monaco is only found on Macs. On Linux installations that do not have M$ web fonts installed, and even on plenty of those that don't, Courier is extra bad, since it's usually an ancient bitmap font (available in limited sizes) instead of a vector font.
2-font size is still disrespecting users. What purpose is served setting small on PRE here?
Not previously mentioned: previous/next and month are set to .7em (physical size 49% of default). Why? http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/area70.html
Even though we have had one screenshot here to show something I would not dare post one to show that in Gmail there is not one iota of difference.
On 13 November 2014 13:42, Felix Miata mrmazda@earthlink.net wrote:
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-12 20:14 (UTC-0600):
Any further suggestions?
Little new. :-(
Better, but:
1-Spindly, worst looking "common" monospace font I've ever seen, Courier, is still what it's using, since Monaco is only found on Macs. On Linux installations that do not have M$ web fonts installed, and even on plenty of those that don't, Courier is extra bad, since it's usually an ancient bitmap font (available in limited sizes) instead of a vector font.
2-font size is still disrespecting users. What purpose is served setting small on PRE here?
Not previously mentioned: previous/next and month are set to .7em (physical size 49% of default). Why? http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/area70.html -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-12 20:14 (UTC-0600):
Any further suggestions?
Little new. :-(
Better, but:
1-Spindly, worst looking "common" monospace font I've ever seen, Courier, is still what it's using, since Monaco is only found on Macs. On Linux installations that do not have M$ web fonts installed, and even on plenty of those that don't, Courier is extra bad, since it's usually an ancient bitmap font (available in limited sizes) instead of a vector font.
What is your font suggestion? Remember I didn't write the mailing list archive software, so I am unaware of the design decisions behind these strange selections. ;-)
2-font size is still disrespecting users. What purpose is served setting small on PRE here?
When I did not explicitly set "small" (i.e. the CSS default of "medium" was used), on my unmodified Firefox installation the text was so large as to render it unreadable without significant effort. Perhaps the difference between my system and yours is related to the font issue?
Not previously mentioned: previous/next and month are set to .7em (physical size 49% of default). Why? http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/area70.html
As mentioned above I'm not the designer of the ezmlm-archive software, so I don't know. Suggestions for fixing it are welcome.
In fact, if you want to draw up a replacement style.css incorporating your changes I can test it here and let you know what I see and if there are issues from my perspective.
Thanks!
Tim
On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 21:38:21 -0600 "Timothy Pearson" kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-12 20:14 (UTC-0600):
Any further suggestions?
Little new. :-(
Better, but:
1-Spindly, worst looking "common" monospace font I've ever seen, Courier, is still what it's using, since Monaco is only found on Macs. On Linux installations that do not have M$ web fonts installed, and even on plenty of those that don't, Courier is extra bad, since it's usually an ancient bitmap font (available in limited sizes) instead of a vector font.
What is your font suggestion? Remember I didn't write the mailing list archive software, so I am unaware of the design decisions behind these strange selections. ;-)
Preferences vary widely, and you will *never* be able to satisfy everyone. Especially not on Linux--although the old font stack creation page I got the data from is down, I'd bet that there's still no single font that can be found on >60% of all Linux boxen. (I prefer Courier New as a monospace font, since it's effectively invisible to me and lets me concentrate on the content. Other people prefer sans-serif monospace fonts.)
You could set "monospace" instead of specifying an individual font, which bats the choice back to the user's browser, but some people will probably complain about even that.
2-font size is still disrespecting users. What purpose is served setting small on PRE here?
When I did not explicitly set "small" (i.e. the CSS default of "medium" was used), on my unmodified Firefox installation the text was so large as to render it unreadable without significant effort. Perhaps the difference between my system and yours is related to the font issue?
And yet, the default size for monospace fonts in an unmodified Firefox profile (I just checked) is 12px, which is pretty small (I jack mine up to 16, which is around 10-11pt on my screen).
Not previously mentioned: previous/next and month are set to .7em (physical size 49% of default). Why? http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/area70.html
As mentioned above I'm not the designer of the ezmlm-archive software, so I don't know. Suggestions for fixing it are welcome.
Probably because the designer who created the original stylesheet considered those links to be less-important elements and was trying to de-emphasise them.
E. Liddell
On Thursday 13 November 2014 11:58:56 E. Liddell wrote:
(I prefer Courier New as a monospace font, since it's effectively invisible to me and lets me concentrate on the content.
To judge by archives, that seems to be most people's prefrence. I find it impossible to read. Perhaps because it is "invisible"? ;-)
Lisi
[I started working on a reply mere hours after the post I'm replying to, spending several hours, then getting interrupted by multiple plumbing troubles and other more pressing matters that usurped most discretionary time during the period since.]
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-12 21:38 (UTC-0600):
Felix Miata composed on 2014-11-12 21:42 (UTC-0500):
Timothy Pearson composed on 2014-11-12 20:14 (UTC-0600):
Any further suggestions?
Little new. :-(
Better, but:
1-Spindly, worst looking "common" monospace font I've ever seen, Courier, is still what it's using, since Monaco is only found on Macs. On Linux installations that do not have M$ web fonts installed, and even on plenty of those that don't, Courier is extra bad, since it's usually an ancient bitmap font (available in limited sizes) instead of a vector font.
What is your font suggestion? Remember I didn't write the mailing list archive software, so I am unaware of the design decisions behind these strange selections. ;-)
....
2-font size is still disrespecting users. What purpose is served setting small on PRE here?
When I did not explicitly set "small" (i.e. the CSS default of "medium" was used), on my unmodified Firefox installation the text was so large as to render it unreadable without significant effort. Perhaps the difference between my system and yours is related to the font issue?
A good bit of the time I spent was trying in TDE on openSUSE 13.1 to get Firefox using as-shipped font settings on a 96 DPI 1280x1024 screen to reproduce "so large as to render it unreadable without significant effort". No joy, unless possibly that comment actually applied to Konq rather than Firefox, SeaMonkey, Chrom*, Safari, or IE....
Not previously mentioned: previous/next and month are set to .7em (physical size 49% of default). Why? http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/area70.html
As mentioned above I'm not the designer of the ezmlm-archive software, so I don't know. Suggestions for fixing it are welcome.
Since you asked....
In fact, if you want to draw up a replacement style.css incorporating your changes I can test it here and let you know what I see and if there are issues from my perspective.
Monospace is a sticky wicket. There's no way to please everyone by declaring family and/or size for PRE content. Defaults and behavior among browsers vary rather more than one would hope. Some of the reasons for the complication can be found among comments in these old and unfixed Mozilla bugs:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175415 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328621 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=380915 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=437531
The best suggestion I can offer is the same as always, defer to the defaults selected by the user. With size and family declarations absent, the user gets those his browser is set to, and if he doesn't like them, it is he in best position to make whatever change it takes to best suit him.
http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Tmp/ contains a bunch of iterations in the form
trinityusers-lists-pearsoncomputing*.html
created from a local copy of one archive message
http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::6951
as
trinityusers-lists-pearsoncomputingSrc.html
for a baseline.
The iterations I like best are
trinityusers-lists-pearsoncomputing5.html style6.css diff15.txt & trinityusers-lists-pearsoncomputing6.html style6.css diff16.txt
5 simply accepts the browser default font family and size for PRE text; IOW, it applies no font styling to PRE. 6 differs in making medium explicit.
The digit in each iteration's filename corresponds to the style#.css each uses from http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Tmp/trinityusers-lists-pearsoncomputingSrc_files/ except for 0, which uses no style sheet at all, so that the original page content can be used to judge suitability of the browser's defaults. Style.css is your original. The same directory contains diffs to style.css in the form diff1#.txt for each iteration except 0, which amount to patches you could apply to make whatever set of changes you might choose.
8 screenshots can be found in
in the form
trinitylistarchiveDev*.jpg
Zoom level in every browser window in them is 100%, aka 0, aka none. Numbers in the filenames 096, 120 and 144 indicate logical screen density of the X server the image was taken from. 4-digit numbers in filenames indicate the image's px height.
The three newest ones, trinitylistarchiveDev096-stack47-3584.jpg, trinitylistarchiveDev096-stack7-3440.jpg and trinitylistarchiveDev120-stack7-4096.jpg have the highest information density, 7 browsers at full screen width in each with one of the test URLs loaded, intended to show subtle and not so subtle differences caused by adjusting browser settings and/or page CSS.
From the top down in the three '###-stack??' images are these browsers:
1-Konq: defaults as shipped, stated in pt, which vary in px size by screen density 2-Chromium: defaults as shipped in 096; size raised one from default setting in 120 to keep its default size in physical pt the same as at 96 DPI. 3-recent Firefox; font sizes as indicated within image (by open prefs panels) 4-recent Firefox; font sizes as indicated within image " 5-recent Firefox; font sizes as indicated within image " 6-Firefox 3.6.28; font sizes as indicated within image " 7-recent SeaMonkey; font sizes as indicated within image "
Selected comments about what may or may not be apparent viewing (mostly) the three 'stack??' images follow:
The as-shipped for Linux Gecko 12px monospace default @96 DPI is physically 9pt (on a display that is in fact 96 DPI). Both Windows and Mac Geckos ship with 13px monospace, which @96 DPI is physically 9.75pt. Chrom* apparently provides 13px @96 DPI as well, which accounts for the PRE paragraph font size difference in '096-stack7' between 2nd (Chromium) and 3rd (Firefox) windows. Browsers, depending on platform, engine and version, sometimes truncate 9.75pt to using 9pt glyphs, while others round up to using 10pt glyphs. Visit http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/font-rounding.html in various browsers to experience their rounding breakpoints. This variation in rounding is the reason why you'll see in my diffs and stylesheets the seemingly insignificant replacement of .9em with .91em.
The bottom two windows on '096-stack7', 6th (Firefox) and 7th (SeaMonkey), show the PRE content difference between 16px monospace unstyled by author declaration, resulting in fontconfig's family used in Firefox, and Courier specified via pref (only for the shot, a choice I would never make for any other purpose) in SeaMonkey.
For '120-stack7', 3 of the 5 Geckos have proportional changed from default 16px to 20px, maintaining physical default size @12pt, and monospace changed from (Linux) default 12px to 17px, resulting in physical 10.2pt that the Geckos render using physical 10pt glyphs.
The difference in physical size between a 12px font (CSS small) and a 16px font (CSS medium), the Gecko on Linux defaults for proportional and monospace, is nominally 56.25% vs 100%. Comparing this to Windows/Mac 13px (9.75pt) monospace, it narrows to 66.0% vs 100%. Due to the higher granularity between nominal sizes with the limited number of pixels each glyph has to work with at lower screen densities, the difference narrows, to a point, as DPI goes up somewhat. @120 DPI (125% of 96), 17px (~10pt) vs 20px (12pt) is reduced to 72.25% vs 100%. cf. http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/CSS/css3/3.4/ for more on this granularity between smallest px sizes issue. The gist here is that on modest DPI desktops, the difference between CSS small and CSS medium is quite substantial.
The newest (47) exists primarily to show the impacts of personalizing browser settings more than site CSS declarations. The top 3 windows, Konq, Chrom* & top Firefox, show wide disparity among the three with the page CSS declaring PRE text CSS small. Next window down (4th) has PRE text up'd from CSS small to .91em with same browser settings. That results in use of identical glyphs, but with character spacing increased (a feature of the font, not the OS or browser) to produce an illusion of larger size. Down one window further (5th) is the #6 page, CSS medium PRE instead of .91em. That results in taller glyphs with reduced character spacing that produce PRE output virtually identical in line width to the window above it. Next window down (6th) is again the medium page, but with the browser's monospace default increased by 1. Once again, glyphs remain same size as above, but increased character spacing makes apparent size larger. Last is medium once again, with the browser's default another size larger, 14px. Once more, taller glyphs with reduced character spacing produce PRE output virtually identical in line width to the window above it.
Among all the PRE fonts in the 47 image, those in Konq are the only ones I find at all appealing, independent of physical size and/or legibility. This underlines why I use low resolution displays only for tasks that cannot be performed otherwise. There simply aren't enough pixels in fonts less than around 15-16px to not be un-appealing to my eyes. At 120 DPI, 14/15/16 cut through the CSS small/x-small range, just on the edge of legible anyway. Everything looks better constructed using more px for any given physical size, even when the density is purely logical rather than physical as well.
One might think monospace font sizes among families would have the same pitch, but that is not the case. http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/fonts-face-samplesM.html shows not only this, but also, much like the just described 47 image, that apparent size varies considerably due to different stroke weights and x-heights incorporated by the displayed font's designer. Coupling apparent size variation with the disparity between CSS small and CSS medium, the possible combinations vary so widely that picking an optimal combination of monospace font family and monospace font size is a tormenting task. Using % or em can reduce granularity between sizes, but doesn't really do more than add to the difficulty of choosing a "best" or "optimal" for anywhere outside the room in which one sits.
Luckily for stylists, deferring to the browsers' monospace defaults is not only easier than making those choices, but for the more popular browsers at least, it does a nice enough job for users who don't touch defaults, and a great job for those that do personalize their personal computing environments via browser font settings.
Epilogue: The following has an excellent description of how big big appears to be in its last half: http://wm4.wilsonminer.com/posts/2008/oct/20/relative-readability/
On Wednesday 19 November 2014 23:13:00 Felix Miata wrote:
The best suggestion I can offer is the same as always, defer to the defaults selected by the user.
:-))
Lisi
P.S. Bad luck about the plumbing problems. I hope that they are satisfactorily fixed. Life does have a habit of intervening. ;-)
On Wednesday 12 November 2014 23:21:51 Michael . wrote:
@Lisi, I think Felix is trying to say that the only reason it is, as you say "Beautifully clear and highly legible" is because you use zoom. If you didn't use zoom then it would not be "Beautifully clear and highly legible". The real point in this is, not the css etc or the pixel setting but rather, the fact you use zoom in this but not in others.
I ALWAYS use zoom. ALWAYS. The TDE archives are then legible. Most aren't.
Lisi
Lisi Reisz composed on 2014-11-12 23:11 (UTC):
Fine. But I can see it. Most archives are virtually inaccessible to me. I like being able to see it, and regard it as a strength of the archives that they make it possible.
Direct link to the prior list-mail-attached screenshot: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::7016:get:1
I've emulated what you did to add such context as browser font settings panels, calculator, and same page opened in browser with no zoom applied: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/KDE/lisiR-TDEarkUnzoomedZoomed1024.png
To get fonts like yours required application of 300% zoom, and changing browser font settings to not allow web pages to use other fonts.
You are able to see what you see there as you do mainly because at some point you applied a defense mechanism called zoom, but also because the font actually used by your browser is bolder than that specified by the page's CSS.
What other lists' archives are a problem for you? Maybe we can help you change something on your system to make it easier for you. Based on the font sizes in your browser UI, one would not expect you to need such big web page fonts for you to be able to consider them "beautifully clear and highly legible". Do you not have a problem reading small fonts in your non-browser apps and TDE menus?
On Thursday 13 November 2014 00:41:04 Felix Miata wrote:
Do you not have a problem reading small fonts in your non-browser apps and TDE menus?
You mean impossible? I simply don't do it.
I change all display to Bitstream Vera Sans and enlarge everything. Why do you think I like TDE?? ;-)
Lisi
On Thursday 13 November 2014 00:41:04 Felix Miata wrote:
What other lists' archives are a problem for you? Maybe we can help you change something on your system to make it easier for you.
That would be great!! Debian for a start!
Based on the font sizes in your browser UI, one would not expect you to need such big web page fonts for you to be able to consider them "beautifully clear and highly legible".
I don't need to "read" everything on the screen. Some things clues are enough. Text of emails I need to read!
Lisi
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 05:17:43 -0800 Dan Youngquist dan@homestead-products.com wrote:
On 11/08/2014 04:50 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Next up, please improve the mailing list archive usability. What I see: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411.png
Proposed fix: [bunch of css stuff snipped]
...or not. Your screen image looks perfectly readable to me. Better to keep the archive simple, fast, and easily usable by everyone, than to add complications that may cause problems for others.
I would evaluate the proposed changes as at worst neutral in complexity terms (removed font size constraint->less complex, width calculation according to font units->more complex internally => changes cancel), for a gain in usability for people with poor vision or odd screen-scaling problems.
E. Liddell
Dan Youngquist composed on 2014-11-09 05:17 (UTC-0800):
Felix Miata wrote:
...
...
Proposed fix:
...
...or not. Your screen image looks perfectly readable to me.
Really, even after you scale the image so that its UI text matches your own in size? Exactly how big is that image on your screen. How big is your screen? How close is it to your eyes?
Apparently the context present in it, and the context absent, escaped your comprehension. Maybe this one will work better: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411-180.jpg
Context present (in both): Notice how much tinier the text in the message body is compared to *all* other text present in the image, including the message's footer. Footers typically contain the smallest text on any given page that has a footer. Why should that not be the case here?
In the earlier screenshot, the 10px message body text is a mere 30.8%[1] of the 18px monospace browser preference and its UI (menu) text, 25% of the 20px proportional browser preference. In the newer, message body text is a mere 14.8% of the size of UI text, 11.1% of the proportional preference.
Context absent: 1-Screen size. Maybe your screen is 27" or more, while mine might be 17", or less. 2-Screen pixel density. Yours might be average, or less. Mine are higher than average. 3-Viewing distance. 4-Visual acuity. Not everyone has equal vision.
Sizing web page text in px is neither necessary, nor respectful of page users. W3 recommends it not be done.[3][4] https://www.trinitydesktop.org/ doesn't do it, and neither should the list archive.
[1] 10^2 / 18^2 = .308 [2] 10^2 / 20^2 = .250 [3] http://www.w3.org/2003/07/30-font-size [4] "Advisory Techniques for 1.4.4 - Resize text" http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/
On Saturday 08 November 2014 21:00:46 Timothy Pearson wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
Tim
Hello Tim, As you no doubt are aware I've had difficulties with both receiving and seeing my own posts on these lists. Gmail/Google seems to be the culprit in my case.
In the first case I get a warning message from "lists.pearsoncomputing.net" telling me that various messages to me have been bounced. In the second I just don't see my posts al all when I receive list mail. I can see them in the archive and I can see them when I use web mail to look at my account.
FWIW It took quite some time before I realised that my Email address is hosted on google servers and that It was part of Gmail.
I'm also a member of a number of other lists and forums, however I don't have any of these issues with them.
Thanks:
folks,
hoping to drink from the font of your wisdom.
I have a NAS through which I can pipe printing via cups. it works fine but I wonder if it wouldn't save electricity to get a dedicated print server and only use the NAS when I am doing serious backups.
btw my problem with kpowersave not showing configuration options was solved (sort of) by restarting /usr/sbin/hald. long for a cleaner solution. that's a different topic.
what about NAS vs print servers?
F.
Am Samstag, 8. November 2014 schrieb Felmon Davis:
folks,
hoping to drink from the font of your wisdom.
I have a NAS through which I can pipe printing via cups. it works fine but I wonder if it wouldn't save electricity to get a dedicated print server and only use the NAS when I am doing serious backups.
btw my problem with kpowersave not showing configuration options was solved (sort of) by restarting /usr/sbin/hald. long for a cleaner solution. that's a different topic.
what about NAS vs print servers?
F.
Anything that consumes power when you do not use it is a waste of some kind, at least of money.
Nik
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
Am Samstag, 8. November 2014 schrieb Felmon Davis:
folks,
hoping to drink from the font of your wisdom.
I have a NAS through which I can pipe printing via cups. it works fine but I wonder if it wouldn't save electricity to get a dedicated print server and only use the NAS when I am doing serious backups.
btw my problem with kpowersave not showing configuration options was solved (sort of) by restarting /usr/sbin/hald. long for a cleaner solution. that's a different topic.
what about NAS vs print servers?
F.
Anything that consumes power when you do not use it is a waste of some kind, at least of money.
Nik
yes, of course.
so the question is: would a print server consume less power?
I assume either it is not on all the time - perhaps hibernates? -, or one can turn it on and off without damaging it? (I don't want to be switching the NAS on and off alot.)
F.
Am Samstag, 8. November 2014 schrieb Felmon Davis:
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
Am Samstag, 8. November 2014 schrieb Felmon Davis:
folks,
hoping to drink from the font of your wisdom.
I have a NAS through which I can pipe printing via cups. it works fine but I wonder if it wouldn't save electricity to get a dedicated print server and only use the NAS when I am doing serious backups.
btw my problem with kpowersave not showing configuration options was solved (sort of) by restarting /usr/sbin/hald. long for a cleaner solution. that's a different topic.
what about NAS vs print servers?
F.
Anything that consumes power when you do not use it is a waste of some kind, at least of money.
Nik
yes, of course.
so the question is: would a print server consume less power?
I assume either it is not on all the time - perhaps hibernates? -, or one can turn it on and off without damaging it? (I don't want to be switching the NAS on and off alot.)
F.
If you do no hard disconnect from the power line for both printer and printserver / NAS it's not worth the efford.
Nik
Tp link sells a little usb->ethernet dongle for printers, use that On Nov 8, 2014 4:04 PM, "Felmon Davis" davisf@union.edu wrote:
folks,
hoping to drink from the font of your wisdom.
I have a NAS through which I can pipe printing via cups. it works fine but I wonder if it wouldn't save electricity to get a dedicated print server and only use the NAS when I am doing serious backups.
btw my problem with kpowersave not showing configuration options was solved (sort of) by restarting /usr/sbin/hald. long for a cleaner solution. that's a different topic.
what about NAS vs print servers?
F.
-- Felmon Davis
Many hands make light work. -- John Heywood
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@ lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists. pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users. pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity. pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Calvin Morrison wrote:
Tp link sells a little usb->ethernet dongle for printers, use that
ah, that's a nice idea!!!
F.
On Nov 8, 2014 4:04 PM, "Felmon Davis" davisf@union.edu wrote:
folks,
hoping to drink from the font of your wisdom.
I have a NAS through which I can pipe printing via cups. it works fine but I wonder if it wouldn't save electricity to get a dedicated print server and only use the NAS when I am doing serious backups.
btw my problem with kpowersave not showing configuration options was solved (sort of) by restarting /usr/sbin/hald. long for a cleaner solution. that's a different topic.
what about NAS vs print servers?
F.
-- Felmon Davis
Many hands make light work. -- John Heywood
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@ lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists. pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users. pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity. pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
On Saturday 08 November 2014 20:57:04 Gerhard Zintel wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here - so long as I use my ISP's SMTP and not Gmail's. If I use Gmail's SMTP then I do not see my own posts.
Lisi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
On Saturday 08 November 2014 20:57:04 Gerhard Zintel wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts.
:-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here - so long as I use my ISP's SMTP and not Gmail's. If I use Gmail's SMTP then I do not see my own posts.
Lisi
But you do see all other posts to the list, correct?
I wonder if gmail is trying to be "helpful" and blocking your posts from coming back in...
Tim
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Timothy Pearson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
On Saturday 08 November 2014 20:57:04 Gerhard Zintel wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts.
:-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here - so long as I use my ISP's SMTP and not Gmail's. If I use Gmail's SMTP then I do not see my own posts.
Lisi
But you do see all other posts to the list, correct?
I wonder if gmail is trying to be "helpful" and blocking your posts from coming back in...
someone else quoted the gmail policy about blocking one's own posts as a 'service' to the sender.
I don't see my posts either because 'union.edu' is gmail, alas.
F.
On Saturday 08 November 2014 21:37:02 Timothy Pearson wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014 20:57:04 Gerhard Zintel wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts.
: :-) :
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here - so long as I use my ISP's SMTP and not Gmail's. If I use Gmail's SMTP then I do not see my own posts.
Lisi
But you do see all other posts to the list, correct?
Yes I see all the other posts.
I wonder if gmail is trying to be "helpful" and blocking your posts from coming back in...
Tim
On Saturday 08 November 2014 21:37:02 Timothy Pearson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
On Saturday 08 November 2014 20:57:04 Gerhard Zintel wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts.
: :-) :
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here - so long as I use my ISP's SMTP and not Gmail's. If I use Gmail's SMTP then I do not see my own posts.
Lisi
But you do see all other posts to the list, correct?
Yes.
I wonder if gmail is trying to be "helpful" and blocking your posts from coming back in...
Yes. It says that it is a feature not a bug.
Lisi
On Saturday 08 November 2014 21:12:23 Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014 20:57:04 Gerhard Zintel wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here - so long as I use my ISP's SMTP and not Gmail's. If I use Gmail's SMTP then I do not see my own posts.
Lisi
Unfortunately my ISP "EE" on the "Freeserve/Orange" network"cannot solve the problem of why I am unable to send or receive Email using them ! Even if I set up a "Windows" machine and let them take it over and play with it. If I mention "Linux" their IT people simply go gaga and have never heard of it. Quite laughable really.
As an aside a couple of my friends who use "EE" and also use both "Linux" and "Windows" can't send or receive Email via "EE" either. Also this is with Email addresses that have been assigned to us by "EE".
Hi Timothy!
2014-11-06 17:43 GMT+02:00 Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net:
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
Was your maintenance work in the beginning of November related to sporadic "bouncing message" issue?
Sometimes messages from the list can't be delivered to my gmail account, and I think it doesn't have to do with my account specifically. Anyway, see the "bouncing warning" as an example below. I receiving such warnings quite often. If it's a problem on the mailing list side, then I could provide more information, not hesitate to ask.
-- Ilya
Here is the "warning" I received today:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: 2014-11-21 2:34 GMT+02:00 Subject: warning from trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net To: ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com
Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net mailing list.
I'm working for my owner, who can be reached at trinity-users-owner@lists.pearsoncomputing.net.
Messages to you from the trinity-users mailing list seem to have been bouncing. I've attached a copy of the first bounce message I received.
If this message bounces too, I will send you a probe. If the probe bounces, I will remove your address from the trinity-users mailing list, without further notice.
Copies of these messages may be in the archive.
To retrieve a set of messages 123-145 (a maximum of 100 per request), send an empty message to: trinity-users-get.123_145@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
To receive a subject and author list for the last 100 or so messages, send an empty message to: trinity-users-index@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Here are the message numbers:
6970 6999
--- Enclosed is a copy of the bounce message I received.
Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON@vali.starlink.edu Received: (qmail 8614 invoked by uid 64014); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 Received: by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) id 4A46664059F; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 (CST) From: MAILER-DAEMON@mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Mail Delivery System) Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender To: trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Auto-Submitted: auto-replied MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: 20141108212727.4A46664059F@mail.pearsoncomputing.net
This is a MIME-encapsulated message.
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Notification Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This is the mail system at host mail.pearsoncomputing.net.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.
If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message.
The mail system
ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com: host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[74.125.201.26] said: 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1 http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550 5.7.1 initiative. hz7si14466145icc.64 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command)
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Delivery report Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.pearsoncomputing.net X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 184B2640507 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Arrival-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:26 -0600 (CST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com Original-Recipient: rfc822;ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 Remote-MTA: dns; gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1 http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550 5.7.1 initiative. hz7si14466145icc.64 - gsmtp
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Undelivered Message Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-Path: trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 184B2640507 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:26 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail.pearsoncomputing.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 4Z0AwczzKYz2 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:25 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CC3E6405B8 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:11 -0600 (CST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pearsoncomputing.net Received: from mail.pearsoncomputing.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id AOFsSTpgHHzp for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:11 -0600 (CST) Received: from vali.starlink.edu (vali.starlink.edu [192.168.1.21]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EC6E6405BE for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:05 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 7106 invoked by uid 1002); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:03 -0600 Mailing-List: contact trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Post: mailto:trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Help: mailto:trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Unsubscribe: mailto:trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Subscribe: mailto:trinity-users-subscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Reply-To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Delivered-To: mailing list trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Received: (qmail 7098 invoked by uid 64014); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:03 -0600 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pearsoncomputing.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1415482021; bh=UzH5/VHrwmb9JvkCfI8ufuvq+VkIKY2AeDPg1SiCdYo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=Po7MpSsKOjADl05QLz3Edy933/1M+IQ9b4Pyj/t36LRcTEcsOLav83eVi2UAwDZ8B7hO9fAFupC2OGM04Y5c+yZM/iyv+T5qwJEs0GBWMcyqWF/C2GCujIi8YjpGuX4F1zzqkAytx0OKyVC2Ppwv6co/KNuD58jJMs65ymkburf5BFfedSArH+EgG0sY2rPdP8j5V5j++kJGiA1IWqWnkcaw/mHbU3F8TlV90cFRSIwUDxVRvAZyuj/159IGv7VXBNnV1loyJdbnFAuPs2vLdgaf3J1Pa69huM0HTHtE7zaMWUrVYIEt0D3av2nulfmZWACQCfjQ3CTC+inGkVsglA== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s2048; d=yahoo.com; b=UCx6qklfZYp+a8IiOkKP9n07+euU/XV5/HABRcNqWg1ngM8fxFJIoE9rVDWSgH8A/uXN/mw0zaXoQrrfGC3qXwKbxqMixmxajFYNq4kCJcfDuaaaeTdZmUgQIDWTtpHZf79/HaV8PSL0VZ+o+Cg3a2DZPBvECIXQvtuuoZNpbJS7M5KwOO6Stv3r724SjHXzlFeU93FUyr0KwnjA9mzRs+QXs70v3MmKT670vs8c8TIniCq0eh5shwHqhd2Nt+27upxoVYt+YLK0+xvWGzSbNhBUBXVJK8UmOGVOYjcEhzBwzN9BMNxpI2+WGd8eBEeA3mJXs01gmg8nGpkLO+7Gew==; X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 819014.71042.bm@smtp110.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: nK7eEHMVM1kn.1lcBElgG120QiF4YnIPZiEja12srvi.zJF qyadEvWorrnd5hc6cw9TzPvEhQ0vQZFUv.PyLrI3q4.FUNKroyazgy857m4I 0X4DvT4HyesYvOkORA.e_Ox_tyoq4bna7Kcd3crmO2VKeMT5m1qbzMU5UA5a 7aAxR.Y1_LgVF4VUoiy4ipQd.IGfxpDZMi.JDewyXlGXw7RQuZd5hIJtKWv6 AVzzTXmyooqoIES7RGE2Ex0oexpa4K4dRAXxpBVqmnjTsdDC_huVRrqPSZrF JcI_kC8aGTe99qCirt_Q8_VYDE3DXJNMxlWCdeE8Nszb_.2JziKI0Gng_ZRP SHzTNL7zCaf6BEtIteoAEihui8yucV7ALCgkstyO6vqneiJhgTW2rcSgi84B UmkwfB3ZNDqOamCSD.J9tiLb3cdWfFKzKPJmDRiNOrX0k.0KrpVzes00AWQs 4qn.VnnWQppsrPdbm0uNOYri3IexjVfqyqzNjd96I.LXJA7KPYZ1VNH0JuZR vhHvxEl6a90GXplGZkwrYoR1eg3gai39YecBJoReyGVur9_lDp7X8yd9s05Y Zfdsn_i20Z_3LL3o27c2DGMzBv547aIbj53W7a_MGP2KLp0YcsxMvKKInF3p n0X25pEhjS2ZVw0a1yWLsy_TUBqav3dH51XQ- X-Yahoo-SMTP: oof8RZSswBD6lyWf5CrTMZF.f7.PtyA- From: Andy Andy4stuff@yahoo.com To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 16:27:01 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 (enterprise35 0.20100827.1168748) References: 7e2577d182b15c9f809141d3b3d77203.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu 201411082157.04471.gerhard.zintel@mrs-thomas.de 020c0156d6b7ef517c3bb28cd2f845be.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu In-Reply-To: 020c0156d6b7ef517c3bb28cd2f845be.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu X-KMail-QuotePrefix: > MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: 201411081627.01647.Andy4stuff@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [trinity-users] Email server maintenance
On Saturday 08 November 2014 04:00:46 pm Timothy Pearson wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
Tim
I'm using Yahoo email through Kmail. I *used* to see my own posts, but haven't in a long time.
Andy
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net--
Hi Guys, Apologies for top post ! I get these messages quite regularly ! Now I just ignore them since most of the posts refered to I seem to get anyway.
Best Regards: Baron
On Friday 21 November 2014 09:12:41 Ilya Dogolazky wrote:
Hi Timothy!
2014-11-06 17:43 GMT+02:00 Timothy Pearson
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
Was your maintenance work in the beginning of November related to sporadic "bouncing message" issue?
Sometimes messages from the list can't be delivered to my gmail account, and I think it doesn't have to do with my account specifically. Anyway, see the "bouncing warning" as an example below. I receiving such warnings quite often. If it's a problem on the mailing list side, then I could provide more information, not hesitate to ask.
-- Ilya
Here is the "warning" I received today:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: 2014-11-21 2:34 GMT+02:00 Subject: warning from trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net To: ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com
Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net mailing list.
I'm working for my owner, who can be reached at trinity-users-owner@lists.pearsoncomputing.net.
Messages to you from the trinity-users mailing list seem to have been bouncing. I've attached a copy of the first bounce message I received.
If this message bounces too, I will send you a probe. If the probe bounces, I will remove your address from the trinity-users mailing list, without further notice.
Copies of these messages may be in the archive.
To retrieve a set of messages 123-145 (a maximum of 100 per request), send an empty message to: trinity-users-get.123_145@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
To receive a subject and author list for the last 100 or so messages, send an empty message to: trinity-users-index@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Here are the message numbers:
6970 6999
--- Enclosed is a copy of the bounce message I received.
Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON@vali.starlink.edu Received: (qmail 8614 invoked by uid 64014); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 Received: by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) id 4A46664059F; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 (CST) From: MAILER-DAEMON@mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Mail Delivery System) Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender To: trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncom puting.net Auto-Submitted: auto-replied MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: 20141108212727.4A46664059F@mail.pearsoncomputing.net
This is a MIME-encapsulated message.
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Notification Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This is the mail system at host mail.pearsoncomputing.net.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.
If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message.
The mail systemilya.dogolazky@gmail.com: host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[74.125.201.26] said: 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1 http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550 5.7.1 initiative. hz7si14466145icc.64 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command)
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Delivery report Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.pearsoncomputing.net X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 184B2640507 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncom puting.net Arrival-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:26 -0600 (CST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com Original-Recipient: rfc822;ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 Remote-MTA: dns; gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1 http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550 5.7.1 initiative. hz7si14466145icc.64 - gsmtp
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Undelivered Message Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-Path: <trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsonco mputing.net> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 184B2640507 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:26 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail.pearsoncomputing.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 4Z0AwczzKYz2 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:25 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CC3E6405B8 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:11 -0600 (CST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pearsoncomputing.net Received: from mail.pearsoncomputing.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id AOFsSTpgHHzp for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:11 -0600 (CST) Received: from vali.starlink.edu (vali.starlink.edu [192.168.1.21]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EC6E6405BE for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:05 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 7106 invoked by uid 1002); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:03 -0600 Mailing-List: contact trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Post: mailto:trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Help: mailto:trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Unsubscribe: mailto:trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Subscribe: mailto:trinity-users-subscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Reply-To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Delivered-To: mailing list trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Received: (qmail 7098 invoked by uid 64014); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:03 -0600 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pearsoncomputing.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1415482021; bh=UzH5/VHrwmb9JvkCfI8ufuvq+VkIKY2AeDPg1SiCdYo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject ; b=Po7MpSsKOjADl05QLz3Edy933/1M+IQ9b4Pyj/t36LRcTEcsOLav83eVi2UAwDZ8B 7hO9fAFupC2OGM04Y5c+yZM/iyv+T5qwJEs0GBWMcyqWF/C2GCujIi8YjpGuX4F1zzqk Aytx0OKyVC2Ppwv6co/KNuD58jJMs65ymkburf5BFfedSArH+EgG0sY2rPdP8j5V5j++ kJGiA1IWqWnkcaw/mHbU3F8TlV90cFRSIwUDxVRvAZyuj/159IGv7VXBNnV1loyJdbnF AuPs2vLdgaf3J1Pa69huM0HTHtE7zaMWUrVYIEt0D3av2nulfmZWACQCfjQ3CTC+inGk VsglA== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s2048; d=yahoo.com; b=UCx6qklfZYp+a8IiOkKP9n07+euU/XV5/HABRcNqWg1ngM8fxFJIoE9rVDWSgH8A/ uXN/mw0zaXoQrrfGC3qXwKbxqMixmxajFYNq4kCJcfDuaaaeTdZmUgQIDWTtpHZf79/H aV8PSL0VZ+o+Cg3a2DZPBvECIXQvtuuoZNpbJS7M5KwOO6Stv3r724SjHXzlFeU93FUy r0KwnjA9mzRs+QXs70v3MmKT670vs8c8TIniCq0eh5shwHqhd2Nt+27upxoVYt+YLK0+ xvWGzSbNhBUBXVJK8UmOGVOYjcEhzBwzN9BMNxpI2+WGd8eBEeA3mJXs01gmg8nGpkLO +7Gew==; X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 819014.71042.bm@smtp110.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: nK7eEHMVM1kn.1lcBElgG120QiF4YnIPZiEja12srvi.zJF qyadEvWorrnd5hc6cw9TzPvEhQ0vQZFUv.PyLrI3q4.FUNKroyazgy857m4I 0X4DvT4HyesYvOkORA.e_Ox_tyoq4bna7Kcd3crmO2VKeMT5m1qbzMU5UA5a 7aAxR.Y1_LgVF4VUoiy4ipQd.IGfxpDZMi.JDewyXlGXw7RQuZd5hIJtKWv6 AVzzTXmyooqoIES7RGE2Ex0oexpa4K4dRAXxpBVqmnjTsdDC_huVRrqPSZrF JcI_kC8aGTe99qCirt_Q8_VYDE3DXJNMxlWCdeE8Nszb_.2JziKI0Gng_ZRP SHzTNL7zCaf6BEtIteoAEihui8yucV7ALCgkstyO6vqneiJhgTW2rcSgi84B UmkwfB3ZNDqOamCSD.J9tiLb3cdWfFKzKPJmDRiNOrX0k.0KrpVzes00AWQs 4qn.VnnWQppsrPdbm0uNOYri3IexjVfqyqzNjd96I.LXJA7KPYZ1VNH0JuZR vhHvxEl6a90GXplGZkwrYoR1eg3gai39YecBJoReyGVur9_lDp7X8yd9s05Y Zfdsn_i20Z_3LL3o27c2DGMzBv547aIbj53W7a_MGP2KLp0YcsxMvKKInF3p n0X25pEhjS2ZVw0a1yWLsy_TUBqav3dH51XQ- X-Yahoo-SMTP: oof8RZSswBD6lyWf5CrTMZF.f7.PtyA- From: Andy Andy4stuff@yahoo.com To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 16:27:01 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 (enterprise35 0.20100827.1168748) References: 7e2577d182b15c9f809141d3b3d77203.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu 201411082157.04471.gerhard.zintel@mrs-thomas.de 020c0156d6b7ef517c3bb28cd2f845be.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu In-Reply-To: 020c0156d6b7ef517c3bb28cd2f845be.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu X-KMail-QuotePrefix: > MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: 201411081627.01647.Andy4stuff@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [trinity-users] Email server maintenance
On Saturday 08 November 2014 04:00:46 pm Timothy Pearson wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote:
The Email server is now back online and functioning normally. Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties.
Thanks!
Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
Tim
I'm using Yahoo email through Kmail. I *used* to see my own posts, but haven't in a long time.
Andy
On Friday 21 November 2014 04:21:32 am Baron wrote:
Hi Guys, Apologies for top post ! I get these messages quite regularly ! Now I just ignore them since most of the posts refered to I seem to get anyway.
Best Regards: Baron
Similar situation here, except I often *don't* see the posts mentioned. I suspect that this is a problem, for me, at the Yahoo end.
Andy
On Friday 21 November 2014 09:12:41 Ilya Dogolazky wrote:
Hi Timothy!
2014-11-06 17:43 GMT+02:00 Timothy Pearson
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
Was your maintenance work in the beginning of November related to sporadic "bouncing message" issue?
Sometimes messages from the list can't be delivered to my gmail account, and I think it doesn't have to do with my account specifically. Anyway, see the "bouncing warning" as an example below. I receiving such warnings quite often. If it's a problem on the mailing list side, then I could provide more information, not hesitate to ask.
-- Ilya
Here is the "warning" I received today:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: 2014-11-21 2:34 GMT+02:00 Subject: warning from trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net To: ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com
Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net mailing list.
I'm working for my owner, who can be reached at trinity-users-owner@lists.pearsoncomputing.net.
Messages to you from the trinity-users mailing list seem to have been bouncing. I've attached a copy of the first bounce message I received.
If this message bounces too, I will send you a probe. If the probe bounces, I will remove your address from the trinity-users mailing list, without further notice.
Copies of these messages may be in the archive.
To retrieve a set of messages 123-145 (a maximum of 100 per request), send an empty message to: trinity-users-get.123_145@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
To receive a subject and author list for the last 100 or so messages, send an empty message to: trinity-users-index@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Here are the message numbers:
6970 6999
--- Enclosed is a copy of the bounce message I received.
Return-Path: MAILER-DAEMON@vali.starlink.edu Received: (qmail 8614 invoked by uid 64014); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 Received: by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) id 4A46664059F; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:27 -0600 (CST) From: MAILER-DAEMON@mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Mail Delivery System) Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender To: trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncom puting.net Auto-Submitted: auto-replied MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: 20141108212727.4A46664059F@mail.pearsoncomputing.net
This is a MIME-encapsulated message.
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Notification Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This is the mail system at host mail.pearsoncomputing.net.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.
If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message.
The mail systemilya.dogolazky@gmail.com: host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[74.125.201.26] said: 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1 http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550 5.7.1 initiative. hz7si14466145icc.64 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command)
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Delivery report Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Reporting-MTA: dns; mail.pearsoncomputing.net X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 184B2640507 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsoncom puting.net Arrival-Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:26 -0600 (CST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com Original-Recipient: rfc822;ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 Remote-MTA: dns; gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1 http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550 5.7.1 initiative. hz7si14466145icc.64 - gsmtp
--184B2640507.1415482047/mail.pearsoncomputing.net Content-Description: Undelivered Message Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-Path: <trinity-users-return-6970-ilya.dogolazky=gmail.com@lists.pearsonco mputing.net> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 184B2640507 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:26 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail.pearsoncomputing.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 4Z0AwczzKYz2 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:25 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CC3E6405B8 for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:11 -0600 (CST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pearsoncomputing.net Received: from mail.pearsoncomputing.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vali.starlink.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id AOFsSTpgHHzp for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:11 -0600 (CST) Received: from vali.starlink.edu (vali.starlink.edu [192.168.1.21]) by mail.pearsoncomputing.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EC6E6405BE for ilya.dogolazky@gmail.com; Sat, 8 Nov 2014 15:27:05 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 7106 invoked by uid 1002); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:03 -0600 Mailing-List: contact trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Post: mailto:trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Help: mailto:trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Unsubscribe: mailto:trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net List-Subscribe: mailto:trinity-users-subscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Reply-To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Delivered-To: mailing list trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Received: (qmail 7098 invoked by uid 64014); 8 Nov 2014 15:27:03 -0600 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pearsoncomputing.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1415482021; bh=UzH5/VHrwmb9JvkCfI8ufuvq+VkIKY2AeDPg1SiCdYo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject ; b=Po7MpSsKOjADl05QLz3Edy933/1M+IQ9b4Pyj/t36LRcTEcsOLav83eVi2UAwDZ8B 7hO9fAFupC2OGM04Y5c+yZM/iyv+T5qwJEs0GBWMcyqWF/C2GCujIi8YjpGuX4F1zzqk Aytx0OKyVC2Ppwv6co/KNuD58jJMs65ymkburf5BFfedSArH+EgG0sY2rPdP8j5V5j++ kJGiA1IWqWnkcaw/mHbU3F8TlV90cFRSIwUDxVRvAZyuj/159IGv7VXBNnV1loyJdbnF AuPs2vLdgaf3J1Pa69huM0HTHtE7zaMWUrVYIEt0D3av2nulfmZWACQCfjQ3CTC+inGk VsglA== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s2048; d=yahoo.com; b=UCx6qklfZYp+a8IiOkKP9n07+euU/XV5/HABRcNqWg1ngM8fxFJIoE9rVDWSgH8A/ uXN/mw0zaXoQrrfGC3qXwKbxqMixmxajFYNq4kCJcfDuaaaeTdZmUgQIDWTtpHZf79/H aV8PSL0VZ+o+Cg3a2DZPBvECIXQvtuuoZNpbJS7M5KwOO6Stv3r724SjHXzlFeU93FUy r0KwnjA9mzRs+QXs70v3MmKT670vs8c8TIniCq0eh5shwHqhd2Nt+27upxoVYt+YLK0+ xvWGzSbNhBUBXVJK8UmOGVOYjcEhzBwzN9BMNxpI2+WGd8eBEeA3mJXs01gmg8nGpkLO +7Gew==; X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 819014.71042.bm@smtp110.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: nK7eEHMVM1kn.1lcBElgG120QiF4YnIPZiEja12srvi.zJF qyadEvWorrnd5hc6cw9TzPvEhQ0vQZFUv.PyLrI3q4.FUNKroyazgy857m4I 0X4DvT4HyesYvOkORA.e_Ox_tyoq4bna7Kcd3crmO2VKeMT5m1qbzMU5UA5a 7aAxR.Y1_LgVF4VUoiy4ipQd.IGfxpDZMi.JDewyXlGXw7RQuZd5hIJtKWv6 AVzzTXmyooqoIES7RGE2Ex0oexpa4K4dRAXxpBVqmnjTsdDC_huVRrqPSZrF JcI_kC8aGTe99qCirt_Q8_VYDE3DXJNMxlWCdeE8Nszb_.2JziKI0Gng_ZRP SHzTNL7zCaf6BEtIteoAEihui8yucV7ALCgkstyO6vqneiJhgTW2rcSgi84B UmkwfB3ZNDqOamCSD.J9tiLb3cdWfFKzKPJmDRiNOrX0k.0KrpVzes00AWQs 4qn.VnnWQppsrPdbm0uNOYri3IexjVfqyqzNjd96I.LXJA7KPYZ1VNH0JuZR vhHvxEl6a90GXplGZkwrYoR1eg3gai39YecBJoReyGVur9_lDp7X8yd9s05Y Zfdsn_i20Z_3LL3o27c2DGMzBv547aIbj53W7a_MGP2KLp0YcsxMvKKInF3p n0X25pEhjS2ZVw0a1yWLsy_TUBqav3dH51XQ- X-Yahoo-SMTP: oof8RZSswBD6lyWf5CrTMZF.f7.PtyA- From: Andy Andy4stuff@yahoo.com To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 16:27:01 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 (enterprise35 0.20100827.1168748) References: 7e2577d182b15c9f809141d3b3d77203.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu 201411082157.04471.gerhard.zintel@mrs-thomas.de 020c0156d6b7ef517c3bb28cd2f845be.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu In-Reply-To: 020c0156d6b7ef517c3bb28cd2f845be.squirrel@vali.starlink.edu X-KMail-QuotePrefix: > MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: 201411081627.01647.Andy4stuff@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [trinity-users] Email server maintenance
On Saturday 08 November 2014 04:00:46 pm Timothy Pearson wrote:
On Saturday 08 November 2014, Andrew Young wrote:
On 07/11/14 11:55, Baron wrote:
On Friday 07 November 2014 03:08:29 Timothy Pearson wrote: > The Email server is now back online and functioning > normally. Please let me know if you encounter any > difficulties. > > Thanks! > > Tim
I wonder, does this mean that I might be able to see my own posts. :-)
That would be a useful feature.
I might missunderstand but - I always see / saw my own mail on the list (working with Kmail). Gerhard
Same here as well, with various clients. I am aware of some providers having interoperability issues with the pearsoncomputing.net Email server; hopefully the upgrade has resolved most of them but I need feedback to know one way or the other.
Tim
I'm using Yahoo email through Kmail. I *used* to see my own posts, but haven't in a long time.
Andy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
Hi Timothy!
2014-11-06 17:43 GMT+02:00 Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net:
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
Was your maintenance work in the beginning of November related to sporadic "bouncing message" issue?
Probably not--that has been ongoing for some time. The maintinance laid the groundwork for me to attempt to deal with the problem via DKIM, but that has not been activated at this time.
Sometimes messages from the list can't be delivered to my gmail account, and I think it doesn't have to do with my account specifically. Anyway, see the "bouncing warning" as an example below. I receiving such warnings quite often. If it's a problem on the mailing list side, then I could provide more information, not hesitate to ask.
The critical portion of the message is this header: "Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted"
As to why Google thinks "pearsoncomputing.net" == "yahoo.com" I have no idea, but it seems that we are not alone in dealing with this issue: http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/31/1 http://onyx-pc.com/content/ezmlm-warning http://osdir.com/ml/opensource-software-security/2014-08/msg00198.html http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/problem-with-squid-users-... etc.
That last message at least outlines the problem. Trouble is we are one of the sites struggling with inertia; we couldn't implement DKIM until the recent upgrades, and after the upgrades I have been too busy with R14 release to roll out DKIM, etc. Boils down to the typical human condition I suppose: too much to do, too little time and money. :-)
Tim
On Friday 21 November 2014 16:19:21 Timothy Pearson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
Hi Timothy!
2014-11-06 17:43 GMT+02:00 Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net:
During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers. It is hoped that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them easier to use.
Was your maintenance work in the beginning of November related to sporadic "bouncing message" issue?
Probably not--that has been ongoing for some time. The maintinance laid the groundwork for me to attempt to deal with the problem via DKIM, but that has not been activated at this time.
Sometimes messages from the list can't be delivered to my gmail account, and I think it doesn't have to do with my account specifically. Anyway, see the "bouncing warning" as an example below. I receiving such warnings quite often. If it's a problem on the mailing list side, then I could provide more information, not hesitate to ask.
The critical portion of the message is this header: "Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted"
As to why Google thinks "pearsoncomputing.net" == "yahoo.com" I have no idea, but it seems that we are not alone in dealing with this issue: http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/31/1 http://onyx-pc.com/content/ezmlm-warning http://osdir.com/ml/opensource-software-security/2014-08/msg00198.html http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/problem-with-squid-users -maillist-td4667315.html etc.
That last message at least outlines the problem. Trouble is we are one of the sites struggling with inertia; we couldn't implement DKIM until the recent upgrades, and after the upgrades I have been too busy with R14 release to roll out DKIM, etc. Boils down to the typical human condition I suppose: too much to do, too little time and money. :-)
It doesn't seem to hurt any of us. R14 was clearly much more important!
Lisi
-
Andrew Young -
Andy -
Baron -
Calvin Morrison -
Dan Youngquist -
Dr. Nikolaus Klepp -
E. Liddell -
Felix Miata -
Felix Miata -
Felmon Davis -
Gerhard Zintel -
Ilya Dogolazky -
Lisi Reisz -
Michael . -
Steven D'Aprano -
Timothy Pearson