You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Nahuel ANGELINETTI <na...@altnetvision.info> on 2007/02/01 13:36:02 UTC

Patch for mod_mbox

Hi,

We are trying to use mod_mbox with large range of mailing lists, and
got some problems, firstly is a problem about spam, if you activate the
Antispam option it obfuscate the email adresses on message view but not
in raw message, so we done a patch to hide the raw message link
( attached file ).

Then another problem is with the encoding, we have lots of
=?iso-8859-1? and others on the mbox files and are not converted by
mod_mbox.

And then mod-mbox-util parse only mbox with list-post, and if we have
some difusion list ( without list-post ) we cannot parse it, what about
it ?

Regards,

-- 
Nahuel ANGELINETTI
Association ~altNetVision
Jabber/XMPP : nahuel@ahtna.org

Re: Patch for mod_mbox

Posted by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org>.
Hi,

Le 1 févr. 07 à 15:48, Nahuel ANGELINETTI a écrit :

> We are firstly users, because we have not only one project, but we can
> contribute as we could ;)

Ok. If you have some time for this these days, shoot patches, we'll  
review them.

Thanks for your work,
- Maxime
-- 
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.

Re: Patch for mod_mbox

Posted by Nahuel ANGELINETTI <na...@altnetvision.info>.
Le Thu, 1 Feb 2007 14:52:55 +0100,
Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org> a écrit :

> Hi,
> 
> Le 1 févr. 07 à 13:36, Nahuel ANGELINETTI a écrit :
> 
> > We are trying to use mod_mbox with large range of mailing lists, and
> > got some problems, firstly is a problem about spam, if you
> > activate the
> > Antispam option it obfuscate the email adresses on message view
> > but not
> > in raw message, so we done a patch to hide the raw message link
> > ( attached file ).
> 
> I remember a previous discussion on this point, but I don't recall  
> the ending. The question is "Do we want a *true* (as in real) raw  
> message, or just an extended display with headers and without MIME  
> decoding ?"
> 
> This is a decision we have to make before starting something because  
> the second solution may involve user interface improvements (such as  
> 'hide/show message headers', this kind of things).

I think the best way is like i done, allowing to hide raw message view
( and disable it )

> > Then another problem is with the encoding, we have lots of
> > =?iso-8859-1? and others on the mbox files and are not converted by
> > mod_mbox.
> 
> At the time I worked on mod_mbox (summer 2005 mostly), the apr-iconv  
> library was not fully functional (or at least not in a easy way with  
> multibyte characters we encounter in UTF-x encoding). I believe the  
> situation has changed now and that we could (finally) integrate  
> charset conversion in mod_mbox.
> 
> The fact that mod_mbox outputs UTF-8 comes from the ASF mailing list  
> systems (for which mod_mbox was initially designed), and we know
> that mod_mbox does not really like other charsets. This is
> definitively a point that must be improved in mod_mbox, along with
> Javascript and user experience.

I think it can be possible to integrate easily the use of a library
like iconv or another. We need this feature rapidly and will try to
make it in those days.

> > And then mod-mbox-util parse only mbox with list-post, and if we
> > have some difusion list ( without list-post ) we cannot parse it,
> > what about
> > it ?
> 
> For the moment, mod-mbox-util relies on the List-Post header to  
> detect the mailing-list name and stuff, but we could make that more  
> "intelligent" I guess.

For this stuff too, i'll work on it, list-post is not the main place
where the mailing list name can be found, like List-Id.

> I don't really have the time this week-end to take a look at these  
> points (I'm leaving to the US on Sunday) but I'll definitively have  
> some time for this, starting next Monday.
> 
> Thanks for your interest in mod_mbox,
> - Maxime
> 
> PS: concerning the attached patch, it is good, but we first have to  
> decide what to do, regarding the question I asked in this email.  
> Other mod_mbox users/developers, what are your thoughts ?

I think like I said, the better way is to enable the possibility to
disable feature ( like antispam ). 
We are firstly users, because we have not only one project, but we can
contribute as we could ;)

Regards,

-- 
Nahuel ANGELINETTI
Association ~altNetVision
Jabber/XMPP : nahuel@ahtna.org

Re: Patch for mod_mbox

Posted by Maxime Petazzoni <ma...@bulix.org>.
Hi,

Le 1 févr. 07 à 13:36, Nahuel ANGELINETTI a écrit :

> We are trying to use mod_mbox with large range of mailing lists, and
> got some problems, firstly is a problem about spam, if you activate  
> the
> Antispam option it obfuscate the email adresses on message view but  
> not
> in raw message, so we done a patch to hide the raw message link
> ( attached file ).

I remember a previous discussion on this point, but I don't recall  
the ending. The question is "Do we want a *true* (as in real) raw  
message, or just an extended display with headers and without MIME  
decoding ?"

This is a decision we have to make before starting something because  
the second solution may involve user interface improvements (such as  
'hide/show message headers', this kind of things).

> Then another problem is with the encoding, we have lots of
> =?iso-8859-1? and others on the mbox files and are not converted by
> mod_mbox.

At the time I worked on mod_mbox (summer 2005 mostly), the apr-iconv  
library was not fully functional (or at least not in a easy way with  
multibyte characters we encounter in UTF-x encoding). I believe the  
situation has changed now and that we could (finally) integrate  
charset conversion in mod_mbox.

The fact that mod_mbox outputs UTF-8 comes from the ASF mailing list  
systems (for which mod_mbox was initially designed), and we know that  
mod_mbox does not really like other charsets. This is definitively a  
point that must be improved in mod_mbox, along with Javascript and  
user experience.

> And then mod-mbox-util parse only mbox with list-post, and if we have
> some difusion list ( without list-post ) we cannot parse it, what  
> about
> it ?

For the moment, mod-mbox-util relies on the List-Post header to  
detect the mailing-list name and stuff, but we could make that more  
"intelligent" I guess.

I don't really have the time this week-end to take a look at these  
points (I'm leaving to the US on Sunday) but I'll definitively have  
some time for this, starting next Monday.

Thanks for your interest in mod_mbox,
- Maxime

PS: concerning the attached patch, it is good, but we first have to  
decide what to do, regarding the question I asked in this email.  
Other mod_mbox users/developers, what are your thoughts ?
-- 
Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org)
-- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.