On Wed, 18 Jun 1997, Adam Luther wrote:
> Right on all accounts!
:) Then read the instructions on using e-mail to approve a post a bit
more throroughly. The entire set of original message headers (or at
minimum, the From/To/Subject/Date/Reply-To would be good) have to be
after the "Approved:" line as I stated.
I.e., if someone sent a message like this:
From: kendall@lists.tax.org
To: thelist@wherever.com
Subject: How're things?
Blah blah blah...
You should send *this* to your list in *your* message body:
Approved: password
From: kendall@lists.tax.org
To: thelist@wherever.com
Subject: How're things?
Blah blah blah...
I'm indenting the lines for clarity only -- don't indent the lines you
put in. This will fix the headers and hopefully get rid of this
atrocity:
> Apparently-To: test-outgoing@mail.cdi.org
and put these lines where they belong (in the headers):
> Sender: owner-test@mail.cdi.org
> Precedence: bulk
Majordomo expects the message headers after the "Approved:" line, so
it puts its own headers ("Sender:" and "Precedence:") after your first
paragraph.
ASIDE TO MAJORDOMO-WORKERS: From my time in majordomo-users, I've
noticed that this is one of the more common problems people have. How
about making Majordomo, when it sees a blank line after "Approved:"
and then no message headers, either (a) put its custom headers (Sender
and Precedence) *before* the message body, or (b) *better*yet* send
the message back for approval again with an error message explaining
that the original headers are missing. Detecting message headers
seems like it should be easy:
/^[-\w]+:\s+.+/ || /^\s+.+/
on each line in the paragraph after "Approved:". If any lines in the
first paragraph after "Approved:" don't match one of those regular
expressions, then that first paragraph is not a bunch of headers. I
think that the approval process should require the headers after
"Approved:" to make sure things work right; the way it works now isn't
very robust.
Anyway, if I'm missing some reason why this wouldn't work, let me
know, as I haven't gone over resend with a fine-toothed comb. But I
did glance some of it, and it seems like *something* along these lines
should be feasible. . . . If it isn't, then feel free to explain or
ignore.
Cheers,
Kendall
|
|
