From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cgf.cx (external.cgf.cx [107.170.62.102]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F8F385B80B for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:42:47 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org C8F8F385B80B X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 cgf.cx A4A8E40640 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-CGF-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 spammy=H*ct:iso-8859-1, H*r:unknown, biggest, nice Received: by cgf.cx (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 03 Apr 2020 12:42:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 12:42:45 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: Overseers mailing list Subject: Re: mailman customization Message-ID: <20200403164245.GB2154@cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: Overseers mailing list References: <3f4869fd-d852-a8a6-117f-e767a417ff95@codesourcery.com> <8d833f8d-243f-e8b8-69ed-124ef33b7746@codesourcery.com> <20200309102520.GQ2156@tucnak> <69bd8396-1e11-6b87-18f2-658fd171ebc2@suse.cz> <2b833ee3-ffdf-c002-a476-458465f0c6bd@suse.cz> <20200403155420.GI323051@elastic.org> <57e8655b-f4f0-ebcc-8991-0f1f336296c3@suse.cz> <20200403163057.GA1922@cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200403163057.GA1922@cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1262.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FORGED_SPF_HELO, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_NONE, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_NEUTRAL, TXREP, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-BeenThere: overseers@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Overseers mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2020 16:42:48 -0000 On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 12:30:57PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 05:58:51PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: >>On 4/3/20 5:54 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: >>>Hi - >>> >>>>I believe we can quite easily customize mailman 2.1 to match our needs. >>>>The biggest challenge I see is a proper testing as I don't see it easy >>>>to set up a local mailman instance. I've got a patch that changes: >>> >>>I suppose we can do some local RPM respins - as long as these changes >>>are small and rare. >> >>That would be great. Should I create a git repo where we'll stack these changes? >> >>> Even with a deadish upstream, distro reporting >>>would be nice, at least at the centos/fedora point (?), as a reference >>>place to stash the patch and get us a bug#. >> >>Can you please do it for me as I don't have any experience with Fedora >>packaging? > >If you're volunteering to maintain your patch, perhaps you should try >learning how to do that? I'll generate this rpm + patches along with instructions on how to do it in the future. cgf