From List-Managers-Owner Mon Oct 18 17:58:34 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-930913) id AA21261; Mon, 18 Oct 93 17:58:34 GMT Received: from de5.ctd.ornl.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-930913) id AA21254; Mon, 18 Oct 93 10:58:24 PDT Received: from localhost (de5@localhost) by de5.ctd.ornl.gov (8.6.2/8.6.2) id OAA16339; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 14:02:03 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 14:02:03 -0400 From: Dave Sill Message-Id: <199310181802.OAA16339@de5.ctd.ornl.gov> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Sendmail 8 heads-up Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I recently switched to sendmail version 8 (highly recommended!) on my mailing list server system, ran into something unexpected. When mail is sent to a mailing list alias, and there's a corresponding owner- alias, the envelope sender is set to the expansion of the owner- alias. For example, given the aliases: my-list: :include:/foo/bar/my-list owner-my-list: me Mail sent to my-list will look like: From me Mon Oct 18 11:00:37 1993 Received: from localhost (foo@localhost) by sws1.ctd.ornl.gov (8.6.2/8.6.2) id LAA26462 for my-list@sws1; Mon, 18 Oct 1993 11:00:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199310181500.LAA26462@sws1.ctd.ornl.gov> From: Joe User To: my-list@sws1.CTD.ORNL.GOV Subject: blah blah blah Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 11:00:35 -0400 Blah blah blah... Eric Allman suggests adding another level of alias, e.g.: my-list: :include:/foo/bar/my-list owner-my-list: my-list-sender my-list-sender: me This will set the envelope sender to "my-list-sender", which will be less confusing to recipients. -- Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov) Computers should work the way beginners Martin Marietta Energy Systems expect them to, and one day they will. Workstation Support -- Ted Nelson URL http://gatekeeper.dec.com/archive/pub/DEC/DECinfo/html/dsill.html From List-Managers-Owner Thu Oct 28 17:14:56 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-931022) id AA13570; Thu, 28 Oct 93 17:14:56 GMT Received: from cs.umb.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-931022) id AA13560; Thu, 28 Oct 93 10:14:39 PDT Received: from cs.umb.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA10619 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Thu, 28 Oct 1993 13:18:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199310281718.AA10619@cs.umb.edu> To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: List Managers/Majordomo BOF at LISA Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1993 13:18:33 -0400 From: "John P. Rouillard" Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The BOF on List Management and Majordomo is scheduled for Tuesday evening from 7 - 8pm. The blurb for it is: This BOF will provide a forum for people who manage mailing lists to get togther and exchange ideas. Additionally, there will be a discussion on the future development directions for the majordomo list management package. Given the changes that are occurring in the majordomo world, a portion of this BOF will revolve around Majordomo. However Brent and I hope that this BOF will not devolve into a Majordomo BOF. I would very much appreciate it if list managers who don't use majordomo would also show up. I think it would be useful to hear about problems that you have with your lists, and other list management software. (Maybe your ideas would make good additions to the majordomo software.) I also realize that list management has many tricky issues that are totally outside the realm of list management software, and those issues neeed to be brought forward regardless of majordomo. I hope to see you there. -- John John Rouillard Special Projects Volunteer University of Massachusetts at Boston rouilj@cs.umb.edu (preferred) Boston, MA, (617) 287-6480 Consulting Systems Programmer Bose (until 10/29/93) rouilj@bose.com Framingham, MA (508) 879-1916 x6483 =============================================================================== My employers don't acknowledge my existence much less my opinions. From List-Managers-Owner Fri Oct 29 22:50:02 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-931022) id AA19714; Fri, 29 Oct 93 22:50:02 GMT Received: from cs.utah.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-931022) id AA19703; Fri, 29 Oct 93 15:49:52 PDT Received: by cs.utah.edu (5.65/utah-2.21-cs) id AA14050; Fri, 29 Oct 93 16:53:53 -0600 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 93 16:53:53 -0600 From: zeleznik@cs.utah.edu (Mike Zeleznik) Message-Id: <9310292253.AA14050@cs.utah.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: hierarchical lists? Cc: zeleznik@cs.utah.edu Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello, In the past we have used simple files and /etc/aliases for list maintenance. We have found that hierarchical list structures, where one list includes other lists, were valuable (examples discussed below). If these were all kept on one machine, then sendmail would do the nice thing of removing duplicate addresses for those people subscribed to multiple included lists. It would also remove duplicates when people cross posted to multiple lists on the same machine. We recently moved to the Boston unix listprocessor software, and realize that it does not deal with this issue (will not remove duplicate addresses as per above). I'm not aware of other list server software that does so. ** Can I ask how others deal with this issue? If at all? Following are some examples of why this hierarchical structure has been valuable to us. I am open for comments on how to do this better. We have numerous lists for managers of different platforms (e.g., sun-managers, hp-managers, sgi-managers, etc.). In order to reach ALL managers, it is nice to just have an all-managers list that simply includes the other lists. This way we automatically reach everyone on all the other lists. Our platform-specific lists also break down into things like sun-managers, sun-contracts, sun-vendors, etc. Thus, we can reach ALL sun "people" by just a sun-all list that includes all the other sun sublists. There are also various "users" lists out there for different machines. Again, including all these lists in an all-users list will let us reach them all. The same may go for a department, where they have a dept-sysadmin, dept-office, dept-part-timers, etc., and then just include these in a dept-all list. We also have a network-outage list that we send to, to try and alert everyone we can reach about pending or current problems. The easiest way to do this is just include all the other manager and user lists. Of course, if one does not get rid of duplicates, people can get many copies of the same message and this is bothersome. Also, people may cross post to multiple lists, and again it would be nice to remove the duplicates. If you see a better way to do this, I am all ears! This was the only way we saw to deal with the manageability issue reasonably. Thanks for your time, Mike Michael Zeleznik Computer Center / Computer Science University of Utah zeleznik@cs.utah.edu Salt Lake City, UT 84112 (801) 585-6156 From List-Managers-Owner Sun Oct 31 00:38:56 1993 Return-Path: Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-931022) id AA22450; Sun, 31 Oct 93 00:38:56 GMT Received: from sgiblab.sgi.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/Brent-931022) id AA22442; Sat, 30 Oct 93 17:38:47 PDT Received: from bolis by sgiblab.sgi.com via UUCP (920330.SGI/911001.SGI) id AA11330; Sat, 30 Oct 93 17:42:49 -0700 Received: by hock.bolis.sf-bay.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0otQOK-0002xLC; Sat, 30 Oct 93 17:11 PDT Message-Id: From: Alan Millar Subject: Re: hierarchical lists? To: zeleznik@cs.utah.edu (Mike Zeleznik) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1993 17:11:31 -0800 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, zeleznik@cs.utah.edu In-Reply-To: <9310292253.AA14050@cs.utah.edu> from "Mike Zeleznik" at Oct 29, 93 04:53:53 pm Reply-To: Alan Millar X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1206 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk And verily didst Mike Zeleznik spake of these matters: > In the past we have used simple files and /etc/aliases for list maintenance. > kept on one machine, then sendmail would do the nice thing of removing > duplicate addresses for those people subscribed to multiple included lists. > We recently moved to the Boston unix listprocessor software, and realize > that it does not deal with this issue (will not remove duplicate addresses > as per above). I'm not aware of other list server software that does so. You might consider a different list manager program, such as Majordomo. Unlike ListProcessor, Majordomo allows you to keep your existing distribution mechanism. You can use your existing sendmail /etc/aliases setup as-is, and have Majordomo add or delete subscribers from the alias lists. In this way, you still take advantage of sendmail's duplicate elimination. Majordomo is available by anonymous FTP from ftp.greatcircle.com - Alan ---- ,,,, Alan Millar amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org __oo \ System Administrator =___/ Action figures sold separately.