From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed May 13 14:55:51 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C592F8818 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:55:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu) Received: from kicp.uchicago.edu (kicp.uchicago.edu [128.135.20.70]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49Md5g11Ysz48lv for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 14:55:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu) Received: from [192.168.43.113] (unknown [172.58.143.112]) (Authenticated sender: galtsev) by kicp.uchicago.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D0674E66B for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 09:48:41 -0500 (CDT) To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: Valeri Galtsev Subject: mailman 3 on FreeBSD- or mailman replacement? Message-ID: <17e9d3c4-2cab-922c-c3d8-1ebef0073556@kicp.uchicago.edu> Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 09:48:38 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49Md5g11Ysz48lv X-Spamd-Bar: ++++++++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=uchicago.edu (policy=none); spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu has no SPF policy when checking 128.135.20.70) smtp.mailfrom=galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu X-Spamd-Result: default: False [8.28 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[uchicago.edu : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[112.143.58.172.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.10]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_XBL(5.00)[112.143.58.172.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.4]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(1.00)[1.000,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,body]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[1.000,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:160, ipnet:128.135.0.0/16, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.18)[ip: (0.49), ipnet: 128.135.0.0/16(0.24), asn: 160(0.20), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-Spam: Yes X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 14:55:52 -0000 Dear All, I'm sure I'm not the only one who runs mailman on FreeBSD servers. Now that python 2.7 is about to go, mailman 2 will follow. There is mailman 3 that is based on python 3. There is, however, no mailman 3 port. I wonder if someone already asked mailman port maintainer about mailman 3. I do not like to bother busy person(s) if someone already did. Or, maybe, install it using pip (pip 3 with python v. 3.x) as mailman website describes for variety of scenarios? This basically brings server update one step towards mess. I kept repeating to people I work for who start using python as significant part of their work environment: Python is a sneaky snake. Namely, python paces fast with changing internals version to version (meaning minor versions here, not only major one). Thus, variety of modules one starts using have to keep up, but some may lag behind, then one may get stuck to older version of something, forcing older version of everything. Not to mention this whole thing being update nightmare. All the time I was mentioning as a counter example: mailman. Though it is written in python, programmers are brilliant to use only fundamental things, thus resulting in product that never brings you any trouble (I mean here myself). I have a bad feeling I can't say the same anymore. One of the indications is: they offer docker container with mailman 3, which in my book indicates exactly that bad thing: "we need a bunch of other things which we can not predict to exist or change in a future, so it is hard to guarantee we will live in some general up-to-date environment of variety of modern systems... so we give you composed environment that will guarantee or product to work in..." I am really upset by my own thoughts. That said, we all know nothing lasts forever. The decision to use mailman was made a couple of decades ago. So, the choice was right, really long lasting, which I'm still happy about. This all leads me to my second question: maybe it is time to replace mailman with some other maillist suite. If someone already made this decision, could you share the reasons, and your new choice: Replacement for mailman? Thanks. Valeri ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++