And verily didst troyer@heffalump.ucsf.edu spake of these matters:
> The internet is exploding, and different listservers are being used by
> many newbies. Listservers, therefore, should be simple and consistent.
> If Majordomo becomes easily extensible (add-in modules), will the user
> interface become even more inconsistant from site to site? (I do want add-in
> modules, mind you.)
The core commands should always remain the same.
> This is a topic with a much greater scope than Majordomo.
True. That's why my recent suggestion of an extended "lists" command
would have it search any text file you care to give it; not just a
list of Majordomo lists (although that is a likely use).
> I would argue
> that bolting such functionality onto Majordomo would be counterproductive.
In what way?
> [something that just occurred to me is that you could set up a network
> of gopher servers pointing into people's majordomo/lists directories,
> with links to other servers or master lists of mailing list servers.
> Don't reinvent the wheel if you don't have to.]
As much as I'd like to see everyone in the world directly connected
to the Internet, the world of e-mail is much bigger than that. (And it
will only get worse, not better, as more X.400 is perpetrated upon us.)
That's one of the points of mail server software like LISTSERV and Majordomo:
bringing some automation to the non-directly connected world. In that
sense, I think that a network of gopher servers would be counter-productive.
- Alan
---- ,,,,
Alan Millar amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org __oo \
System Administrator =___/
If only we were all weiner dogs, our problems would be solved! -Brave Little Toaster
References:
|
|
