Precedence bulk

Hi

When I send an comment and CC a mailing list, the users in mailing
list do not receive the comment.

Is there a way not to put `Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a
ticket owner?

Here is an snippet from the qmail log and systems@example.net is a
mailing list (using ezmlm)

2009-07-11 15:43:10.056011500 new msg 403693
2009-07-11 15:43:10.056017500 info msg 403693: bytes 3175 from
nobody@webrt.example.net qp 10275 uid 7801
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098004500 starting delivery 3453258: msg 403693 to
local systems@example.net
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098057500 status: local 1/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149047500 delivery 3453258: success:
Precedence:junk-_message_ignored/did_0+0+1/
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149572500 status: local 0/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.150401500 end msg 403693

Thanks
Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Hi

When I send an comment and CC a mailing list, the users in mailing
list do not receive the comment.

Is there a way not to put `Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a
ticket owner?

Is commenting the following line the only option?

grep Precedence /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm

$self->SetHeader( ‘Precedence’, “bulk” )
unless ( $self->TemplateObj->MIMEObj->head->get(“Precedence”) );

Here is an snippet from the qmail log and systems@example.net is a
mailing list (using ezmlm)

2009-07-11 15:43:10.056011500 new msg 403693
2009-07-11 15:43:10.056017500 info msg 403693: bytes 3175 from
nobody@webrt.example.net qp 10275 uid 7801
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098004500 starting delivery 3453258: msg 403693 to
local systems@example.net
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098057500 status: local 1/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149047500 delivery 3453258: success:
Precedence:junk-_message_ignored/did_0+0+1/
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149572500 status: local 0/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.150401500 end msg 403693

Thanks

Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Hi

When I send an comment and CC a mailing list, the users in mailing
list do not receive the comment.

Is there a way not to put �`Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a
ticket owner?

Is commenting the following line the only option?

grep Precedence /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm

$self->SetHeader( ‘Precedence’, “bulk” )
unless ( $self->TemplateObj->MIMEObj->head->get(“Precedence”) );

This code says "Set a Precedence header unless one already exists"
so just add a Precedence: header to you template and RT won’t stick
bulk in there

-kevin

Hi

When I send an comment and CC a mailing list, the users in mailing
list do not receive the comment.

Is there a way not to put `Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a
ticket owner?

Here is an snippet from the qmail log and systems@example.net is a
mailing list (using ezmlm)

2009-07-11 15:43:10.056011500 new msg 403693
2009-07-11 15:43:10.056017500 info msg 403693: bytes 3175 from
nobody@webrt.example.net qp 10275 uid 7801
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098004500 starting delivery 3453258: msg 403693 to
local systems@example.net
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098057500 status: local 1/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149047500 delivery 3453258: success:
Precedence:junk-_message_ignored/did_0+0+1/
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149572500 status: local 0/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.150401500 end msg 403693

Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Hi

When I send an comment and CC a mailing list, the users in mailing
list do not receive the comment.

Is there a way not to put `Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a
ticket owner?

Is commenting the following line the only option?

grep Precedence /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm

$self->SetHeader( ‘Precedence’, “bulk” )
unless ( $self->TemplateObj->MIMEObj->head->get(“Precedence”) );

Here is an snippet from the qmail log and systems@example.net is a
mailing list (using ezmlm)

2009-07-11 15:43:10.056011500 new msg 403693
2009-07-11 15:43:10.056017500 info msg 403693: bytes 3175 from
nobody@webrt.example.net qp 10275 uid 7801
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098004500 starting delivery 3453258: msg 403693 to
local systems@example.net
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098057500 status: local 1/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149047500 delivery 3453258: success:
Precedence:junk-_message_ignored/did_0+0+1/
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149572500 status: local 0/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.150401500 end msg 403693


Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

Dear Mr. Iqbal,

It is a horrible idea to not use the “precedence: bulk” header
in mail generated by a program. It can trigger many problems
(read system DoS) from other auto-responders such as vacation
and other filters. I think that qmail supports “+” addressing
so what about having qmail strip the “precedence: bulk” header
when a message is sent to xxx+notbulk@yyy. Then you could at
least avoid putting such behavior in RT proper. Having been
witness to such changes in the past and the inevitable fallout
and needed reparation, I would discourage this change. Another
option would be to use a group in RT and cc it. I think there
is a recipe for that in the wiki.

Regards and good luck.
KenOn Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:23:18PM -0400, Asif Iqbal wrote:

On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Asif Iqbalvadud3@gmail.com wrote:

Hi

When I send an comment and CC a mailing list, the users in mailing
list do not receive the comment.

Is there a way not to put ?`Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a
ticket owner?

Is commenting the following line the only option?

grep Precedence /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm

$self->SetHeader( ‘Precedence’, “bulk” )
unless ( $self->TemplateObj->MIMEObj->head->get(“Precedence”) );

Here is an snippet from the qmail log and systems@example.net is a
mailing list (using ezmlm)

2009-07-11 15:43:10.056011500 new msg 403693
2009-07-11 15:43:10.056017500 info msg 403693: bytes 3175 from
nobody@webrt.example.net qp 10275 uid 7801
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098004500 starting delivery 3453258: msg 403693 to
local systems@example.net
2009-07-11 15:43:10.098057500 status: local 1/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149047500 delivery 3453258: success:
Precedence:junk-_message_ignored/did_0+0+1/
2009-07-11 15:43:10.149572500 status: local 0/50 remote 0/300
2009-07-11 15:43:10.150401500 end msg 403693


Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?


Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?


http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

Is there a way not to put `Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a ticket owner?
Is commenting the following line the only option?
You can override the header without modifying the code base by
supplying an alternate value in your template.

It is a horrible idea to not use the “precedence: bulk” header
in mail generated by a program. It can trigger many problems
It causes problems either way. It’s not an RFC header, and
its treatment varies widely. For instance, some poorly designed
systems take it to be equivalent to SPAM.

For this reason we use Precedence: auto-response in our templates.

Is there a way not to put `Precendence: bulk’ for comments made by a ticket owner?
Is commenting the following line the only option?
You can override the header without modifying the code base by
supplying an alternate value in your template.

It is a horrible idea to not use the “precedence: bulk” header
in mail generated by a program. It can trigger many problems
It causes problems either way. It’s not an RFC header, and
its treatment varies widely. For instance, some poorly designed
systems take it to be equivalent to SPAM.

For this reason we use Precedence: auto-response in our templates.

So just modify the correspondence template (I use it for comment and
correspondence)
like this?

RT-Attach-Message: yes

Precedence: auto-reponse
{$Transaction->Content()}

Like above?

Asif Iqbal
PGP Key: 0xE62693C5 KeyServer: pgp.mit.edu
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

So just modify the correspondence template (I use it for comment and
correspondence)
like this?

RT-Attach-Message: yes

Precedence: auto-reponse
{$Transaction->Content()}

No, it’s a header, so it goes before the blank line.

Note that auto-response has no particular meaning,
but was a random value I chose as an alternative to the inaccurate “bulk”