On 18 Apr 1999 00:24:36 -0500, email@example.com wrote:
>>>>>> "JHG" == Jeremy H Griffith <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>JHG> Here are the secret rules:
>Why do you call them "secret"?
Because they are not written out completely anywhere. The
list-owner-info is critically incomplete.
>JHG> 1. Make sure there is *no blank line* between the headers your mail
>JHG> client is providing, and the Approved: line.
>This is in list-owner-info:
> 2) Edit the file to insert a line that says "Approved: password" (where
> "password" is the password for your list) at the top, before the
> original message, with absolutely no intervening space:
>And there's an example as well.
Yes, that one is mentioned. But note the difference between an
"aside" at the end, and the point being the subject of the
sentence. It's easy to miss the aside condition; people are
not computers, who notice every clause.
>JHG> 2. Delete all headers from the original message *except* To:, From:,
>JHG> Subject:, and Date:,
>This is not necessary and is ill-advised; removing References: and
>In-Reply-To: removes very useful info used to reconstruct threads. Of
>course, you really can put anything you want in the headers as long as
>they're legal if that makes you happy, but it certainly doesn't help
>anything to remove them.
Wrong. If you have any Received: headers that run more than a line
(as all of them do in a mail client), the headers "end" at the
continuation line, so the real To:, From:, etc. never appear in the
headers of the list message. (They are part of the message body
instead.) This makes for nasty messages, with the list-owner still
shown as From:.
In addition, I've seen headers that appeared after the "big 4" become
part of the message body rather than the headers, like Message-Id:.
That is, they are visible even when *not* showing headers.
>JHG> Yes, if you follow its (unwritten) rules... not even in the FAQ,
>The rules are plainly written in list-owner-info. At least, I tried to
>make them plain; I included examples. The user's problem in this case is
>that they claim to be following the directions properly and still are
>experiencing failures. This is troubling to me, and I'd like to get to the
>bottom of it.
As I said, and explained in detail above, your directions are too
terse and are seriously incomplete. It would be very nice if you
corrected them. I do not think you will see failures if you begin
following my instructions (which could certainly be better written);
I have not, and I handle a couple bounces a day that way (mainly
non-subscriber posts). It took trial and error to derive the rules.
Jeremy H. Griffith email@example.com
VP, Software Development http://www.omsys.com/
Omni Systems, Inc. California and Vermont, USA