On 9 Sep 1996, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> The real point of this whole thing is that if the core is set up and
> programmed correctly these interfaces (and more, if someone dreams them up)
> will all be possible, can all be used concurrently and are not all
> required. It's almost premature to begin to design the interfaces before
> the groundwork has been laid.
Amen. I agree fully. Once the basic low-level modularity exists, then
everybody will have more choices, not fewer.
> I still think that forcing the admin to use a Web interface is asking too
> much. It's a nice thing to have, but so are the other interfaces mentioned
> (email, as we already have, and command line). I only say this because
> it's been said before that everything except for the web interface is
> superfluous.
Not forced! :-) But I believe most administrators that can would choose a
web interface if available!
> It is in there. I see this working as follows:
>
> User hits "subscribe" button, enters address on form. Form responds with
> "a confirmation message has been mailed to this address. When it arrives,
> please fill in the following form with the information given in the
> message."
>
That will work. One could also code the confirmation message in such a
way that the user only has to hit 'reply' in his mailer to finish
subscribing himself. The message would already have a crypt key on it...
I think this is the same as currently in 1.94 but I am not sure...
We just want to check that the address is valid and that the subscription
is voluntary.
> I feel like a dinosaur. The one nice, easy thing that a web interface
> would give that you don't get now is a quick means of picking addresses to
> nuke from a list. This would probably be useless for a large list,
> though. But then the only reason I use a windowing system is to get a
> bunch of command-line interfaces all on one screen.
Don't feel like a dinosaur! :-) Though, I think the web interface is more
useful than you realize...
Take for example, the case of an administrator subscribing and
unsubscribing members: he has to enter the list password on every approve
line. With a web interface, he enters the list password only once, when
he first accesses the html form with the admin interface. After that he
only has to enter names and addresses, and hit 'subscribe'.
For unsubscribes, a search function based on Perl pattern matching or
glimpse could be devised. The script would list all the matches. The
admin clicks on the match to be unsubscribed, or renamed, or changed
address, or upgraded, or admonished... ;-)
There are other subtle advantages to the web. One silly problem I have
had is that one of my administrators uses an e-mail program that
wordwraps long majordomo command lines... screwing the command in the
process because the wrong address or an incomplete name gets added to the
list. With a web form and Text Edit fields this is unlikely to happen.
Admins see mistakes instantly on the web. They have to do less typing to
get a list of members for example. Just choose the 'list members' menu,
and voila!
Now, for sysops and ISPs (my case)... a command line interface is great...
but I digress... first the low-level stuff has to be in place!
regards,
Carlos M. Gutierrez
Puerto Rico Internet Corp.
carlos@ipr.net
p.s. One other wish item for 2.0 ... how about "modularizing" the help
and other messages that Majordomo sends to list members and
administrators? I am thinking in terms of having lists send the help
message in Spanish or French for example... It would be configured per
list. I'm going to sleep...
> --
> Jason L. Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-8684 - 221SR1
> System Manager: University of Houston High Performance Computing Center
> 1994 PC800 "Kuroneko" DoD# 1723
>
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
