Be forwarned that with LISTSERV, you MUST change a default setting for every
list you create or your list will be advertised (without your approval) at
the www.listserv.com website too. I have been trying for 11 months to get
dead inactive lists removed from their site without success. Blame it on
the CATALIST product, but either way, if you do not know this is happening
it WILL happen.
Dan Liston
"Scott D. Allen" wrote:
>
> I'd like to chime in with Mr. Mills on this one. I agree with most of what
> he is saying. I too am pretty new to "lists" and have tried Majordomo (w/
> and w/o Majorcool) and LISTSERV. I also (thanks to Mr. Mills) downloaded and
> am testing Mailman. Of the three packages I've tested so far, Majordomo is
> the most difficult to configure/use. Now, here is where I'm going to enter
> my disclaimer. From a SECURITY standpoint anything with a "web" interface is
> suspect, to say the least. I haven't tested the security of Mailman, but the
> LISTSERV and Majorcool implementations are much more susceptable to attack
> than straight Majordomo. There are pluses and minuses, but I'm sure the
> sentiment among the long time mj-er's is that "web=bad". Just my $0.02.
> IMHO for internal/informal lists, the Mailman/LISTSERV implementations are
> pretty much the way to go.
>
> --Scott
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Mills CP [mailto:C.P.Mills@rmcs.cranfield.ac.uk]
> >Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 6:26 AM
> >To: 'majordomo-users@greatcircle.com';
> >'majordomo-workers@greatcircle.com'
> >Subject: The future of Majordomo
> >
> >
> >Having only just started out trying to use majordomo, I
> >probably don't share
> >the same level of loyalty as some users on this list. However,
> >I feel I need
> >to question the future of majordomo. I myself have had problems getting
> >majordomo to work, whether this was due to a conflict or a bug
> >in either my
> >OS or version of perl I do not know, but when mj stripped and
> >processed the
> >headers, the entire message was stripped as well meaning that no valid
> >commands were found.
> >
> >I managed to fix this to a fasion by completely rewritting the message
> >handling code to use the Mail::Internet modules available for Perl.
> >
> >I keep reading that version 2 is well on it's way, but
> >refering to a book I
> >have that was published I think in '94, it seems that
> >Majordomo v2 was on
> >it's way then too.
> >
> >A colleague told me about an open source program distributed
> >under the GPL
> >called mailman which is currently in version 2.0beta6 which
> >offered all the
> >functionality or majordomo plus more. I downloaded it with the idea of
> >looking at it and installed it. I must say that it is IMHO far
> >superior to
> >mj. It includes automatic digesting and archiving and even
> >provides a web
> >based interface to the configuration and management functions and the
> >archive which can be viewed in a number of different ways. I
> >think I will
> >now use mailman as my MLM.
> >
> >What I am trying to say, is that sure, mj seems like it is a
> >good product,
> >and given the wide spread use of it, I have no doubt that it
> >is (when you
> >can get it working), but unless it develops somewhat faster
> >than it appears
> >to be at the moment, then other products, e.g. mailman are
> >clearly going to
> >take the lead.
> >
> >So come on guys, get on with it. Make majordomo a product I, as a MLM
> >manager cannot afford to be without.
> >
> >P.S. Check out http://www.list.org/ for more information on mailman.
> >
References:
|
|
