On 21 Mar 1997, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>> "CH" == Chael Hall <nowhere@chaos.taylored.com> writes:
>
>The point is that digest can say "deliver this message to this class of
>subscribers, except for these users" and the delivery engine takes care of
>it. This works already. Building up the digests is something that needs
>to be done.
Does the new Mj provide its own delivery engine? I like the way qmail
handles message delivery already... It works well with a flat file of
recipients. If there is an implementation that involves writing a file to
disk containing the recipient list, that would work for me. If Mj is
delivering everything itself, I don't know how I feel about this.
>And then there's the issue of MIME vs. traditional format digests. That
>should arguably be a per-user thing, too. Ugh.
Yes, it should. Yes, I want MIME support. :)
>That should be pretty easy to figure out, once the digest gets written.
>What was the other feature? (Well, keep it in mind; I'm not really on a
>feature hunt right now as my TODO list is huge already.)
The other feature was really a cluster of features made possible by using
a database format (albeit a text file database.) It was auto
unsubscription for bouncing addresses, postponing mail (I saw that on your
list), keeping subscriber names (I use strip because my mailer doesn't
like "superfluous" stuff in the list files.)
>The defaults stick around. (Default list works just like -l does now; in
>fact calling mj_email with -l just does an implicit "default list
>$opts{l}".) You can unset them with
Great! Is that available in 1.94.1?
>OK. That's one. But what about the flag settings and naming of the
>digests? Should we try to copy the flags (ack/noack) when they coincide in
>purpose? Some of the listserv flags seem to have pretty unintuitive names,
>though. (Sorry, no example at this moment.)
I say make the primary and advertised method be what's intuitive. Perhaps
support the "traditional" methods like I support people who can't put a
dash between x-files and digest; write a little one-liner that explains
how their command was translated:
subscribe x-files digest
**** Request redirected to list 'x-files-digest'
**** Succeeded.
>I'm starting to lean towards
>
>set list digest (defaults to something the list owner sets)
>set list digest-large (-medium, -small)
>
>instead of "set list digest large" because it makes the parsing a bit
>easier.
The dashes are better, but people won't always put them in. The hack to
redirect "list digest" to "list-digest" is trivial, so I would implement
it as I described the other feature above. Sorry! I know it's a bit more
work, but the idea is to make it easier for people to get along with the
list software. Since this is a goal, a certain amount of forgiveness is
required.
Chael
--
Chael Hall, nowhere@chaos.taylored.com
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
