switch to mailman (was: [svlug] Re: [svlug]syslogd question)

Ray Olszewski ray at comarre.com
Mon May 1 19:07:05 PDT 2000


At 05:24 PM 5/1/00 -0700, Rick Moen wrote [in part]:

>The Mailman maintainers seem to have been so proud of that feature that
>they keep omitting the e-mail-only subscribe/unsubscribe information from
>the HTML list-information templates.  I personally consider this
>omission annoying and a minor bug -- and keep intending to fix the HTML
>on my own Mailman installation.  (In fact, I did so on the 486, and no
>doubt have to do it again, now that I've migrated my machine to my K6.)
[additional helpful details omitted]

Thanks for the detailed response, Rick. I've only started encountering
mailman and am still trying to get used to its features.

It strikes me that changing the method of subscribing is going to be
somewhat disruptive of the habits people have about mailing lists. I don't
just mean svlug. Until the last few months, when someone told me about a new
list, I'd assumed I could join it (if it is a public list) by sending the
usual message to majordomo at someplace_or_other.com . Mailman's
[listname]-requests may well be an improvement, but what it obviously is is
different, and in this context, that feels like not a good thing.

Do you know if anyone has thought of ... or even done ... a
"majordomo-compatibility" add-on that processes requests sent the "old" way?
Or even if the internal logic of mailman would permit that? Something like
that seems a natural analog of the practice of ALL Unix/Linux MTAs (all I
know, anyway) including a link that lets them run if called as "sendmail".

Just a thought ....

------------------------------------"Never tell me the odds!"---
Ray Olszewski                                        -- Han Solo
Palo Alto, CA           	 	         ray at comarre.com        
----------------------------------------------------------------






More information about the svlug mailing list