Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Users
(March 2002)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: majordomo2
From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk @ queernet . org>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 20:50:28 -0800
To: Eric Crump <eric @ interversity . com>,Majordomo Users <Majordomo-users @ greatcircle . com>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10203311853140.30881-100000@interversity.interversity.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020331162635.04021018@gopostal.onlinepolicy.net>

At 06:56 PM 3/31/2002 -0600, Eric Crump wrote:
>Would you be willing to say how majordomo2 is working out for you? It
>seems to be in perpetual alpha status, but I know folks are using it. I
>tried once to get it going but ran into a few problems and because of
>serious time-crunches at the time, gave up and stuck with 1.94.x.

It's working out very, very well for me.

It's in perpetual alpha for a couple of reasons.  For a couple of years, it 
was because of the reliance on a single developer, and especially one 
period of overwork and burnout he experienced.  There are now two principal 
developers, and I'd say the biggest causes if its being pre-beta are the 
lack of documentation and of a pre-packaged installer.

>Is converting a 1.94.x site to 2.x relatively simple or fairly
>complicated?

It can be fairly straightforward.

>Is the current version of 2.x pretty stable?

Stable in terms of not changing frequently?  No -- there are some areas 
that have changed significantly.  Those changes, however, haven't had 
significant impact on operations.  Stable in terms of things not 
breaking?  Well, they break more than they do on a product that hasn't been 
touched in three years, of course... :)  But they're also addressed rapidly.

As for versions... that's the other thing.  They're not really making 
releases yet, just checkouts.

I really wish they'd rename it, since it has very little in common with 
Majordomo, other than the ability to convert to it pretty easily from 
Majordomo.  I think the first release shouldn't be Majordomo 2.0, but 
rather, Majordomo2 1.0.

>Are the new
>features worth the move?

For me, they totally were.  It's more efficient, it gives much more control 
over delivery and access to features, it makes it possible to automate the 
sending of things like questionnaires to potential subscribers.  And it has 
the concept of a user with multiple subscriptions, rather than totally 
isolated lists, so a subscriber can turn off mail for vacation simply by 
sending

         approve PASSWORD set ALL nomail

when they go and

         approve PASSWORD set ALL mail

when they get back.  And they can change their addresses not by 
unsubscribing and subscribing to each list, but by sending

         approve PASSWORD changeaddr OLDADDRESS

from their new address...




References:
  • Re: Mailman
    From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk@queernet.org>
  • majordomo2
    From: Eric Crump <eric@interversity.com>
Indexed By Date Previous: Mailman and others...?
From: "albert" <emmanuel@mwt.net>
Next:
From: (nil)
Indexed By Thread Previous: majordomo2
From: Eric Crump <eric@interversity.com>
Next: Mailman and others...?
From: "albert" <emmanuel@mwt.net>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com