2.10.9 beta is out. I seriously need some feedback: [snip] Direct Links: * tar.gz format: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mojomail/dada-2_10_9_beta1b.tar.gz? download * zip format: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mojomail/dada-2_10_9_beta1b.zip? download Note that this is still a beta release, but the code is quite mature. Even so, we still need your help in testing out the program and helping find the last little bits that needs polishing. The complete changelog for this version can be found at: htt ...Continue Reading

Hey Guys, I'm getting over an eye infection, so I haven't done as much Dada Development as I'd like, but some things getting finished up: * Updated the docs for FCKEditor - which has recently been updated to version 2.3. The current docs work basically, but I played with the php file upload browser connector thingy and got some directions for those as well. * Working on getting Session management to be SQL compatible. Currently, sessions are saved as individual files - these files seem to like to litter ...Continue Reading

On Jun 22, 2006, at 3:30 PM, Andreas Grau wrote: > I am looking Dada 2.10.8 PRO. Mystery Girl, and others, are in the > extensions directory, yet Config.pm points them to plugins. What is > the recommended way to handle this ? It is a little confusing, but Mystery Girl started as an extension, and I tacked on the ability to use it as what's basically known as a plugin, but because of how the versioning control works, I haven't moved it over to where the plugins reside. The other extension don't hav ...Continue Reading

I am looking Dada 2.10.8 PRO. Mystery Girl, and others, are in the extensions directory, yet Config.pm points them to plugins. What is the recommended way to handle this ? a) copy from extensions/ to plugins/ b) change Config.pm c) maintain $ADMIN_MENU in an outside config file Speaking of outside configuration, can't we have $PLUGIN_URL settable in the outside configuration as well ? As of now, it wants plugins/ and extensions/ in the same directory, read URL, as mail.cgi - wouldn't it be sufficient to have line 1 ...Continue Reading

On 16 Jun 2006 17:02:09 -0000 "Dada Mail \(Justin Simoni\)" wrote: > > > What I am trying to say is that e-mails send to a list of people > > should > > have the Priority: header. This is a hint to autoresponders that they > > shouldn't reply. > > Alright, well that's easy enough, I'll set a Priority header, and see > if that doesn't help in the future :) It's Precedence: (my fault of bringing Priority: into play) - Dada Mail has this as an option (but I believe it ...Continue Reading

Do you Yahoo!? Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. Post: mailto:dadadev@PROTECTED Unsubscribe: http://mojo.skazat.com/cgi-bin/dada/mail.cgi/u/[list]/ List Information: http://mojo.skazat.com/cgi-bin/dada/mail.cgi/list/[list] Archive: http://mojo.skazat.com/cgi-bin/dada/mail.cgi/archive/[list] ...Continue Reading

> Justin, BIG misunderstanding ! I am by no means complaining about > anything ! Oh goodness! Both ways then, I'm just a little fed up with badly written auto-responders, spam, etc, > What I am trying to say is that e-mails send to a list of people > should > have the Priority: header. This is a hint to autoresponders that they > shouldn't reply. Alright, well that's easy enough, I'll set a Priority header, and see if that doesn't help in the future :) ...Continue Reading

RFC-3834 http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc=3834 A response MAY include a Precedence field [I4.RFC 2076] in order to discourage responses from some kinds of responders which predate this specification. The field-body of the Precedence field MAY consist of the text "junk", "list", "bulk", or other text deemed appropriate by the responder. Because the Precedence field is non-standard and its interpretation varies widely, the use of Precedence is not specifically recommended by thi ...Continue Reading

Justin, BIG misunderstanding ! I am by no means complaining about anything ! What I am trying to say is that e-mails send to a list of people should have the Priority: header. This is a hint to autoresponders that they shouldn't reply. My suggestion was to have Dada and at least have Priority: list. This guy here mentions Precedence: list as a hint. So this may need to be verified. http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/auto-resp/ Hope I explained myself better now. Andreas On 15 Jun 2006 08:07:25 -0000 "Dada Mai ...Continue Reading

On Jun 14, 2006, at 11:25 PM, Andreas Grau wrote: > > On 12 Jun 2006 17:37:29 -0000 > wrote: >> Thank you for writing FCCS.INFO >> >> This is an autoreply. >> >> The address you have reached is now a receive-only inbox. > > I checked the Dada-Headers from this mail, there is no Priority: Check your message - there's no Priority header in yours either :) I'm not quite sure what to do about spam, auto-replies, etc. You'd think that auto-repliers would be smart enough not ...Continue Reading