Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Workers
(October 1997)
 

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

Subject: Re: Is 'wh*ch' useful?
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs @ hpc . uh . edu>
Date: 14 Oct 1997 14:31:11 -0500
To: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Cc: majordomo-workers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: Chuq Von Rospach's message of Tue, 14 Oct 1997 11:18:19 -0700
References: <v03110701b069663efc23@[207.167.80.70]>

>>>>> "CVR" == Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> writes:

CVR> o Which returns lists which are exact matches on the address in the
CVR> header.

CVR> o Which returns information that matches what mungedomain would allow
CVR> (i.e., fred@foo.com matches taht and fred@bar.foo.com).

These are equivalent in 2.0; the act of matching goes through the
canonicalization process.

CVR> o If someone is trying to find what address they're subscribed to,
CVR> data is only returned for their current domain, and only for
CVR> advertised lists: (i.e, "which fred", from fred.farkle@foo.com, only
CVR> returns addresses who's user component includes fred from *.foo.com).

That seems too restrictive to be useful, since most users don't change
account names, they change Internet providers.  But the more I think about
it, the 'which' command was originally intended to show you what lists you
(i.e. the address you sent mail from) were on.  Right now 'lists=extended'
does that and 'which' is just a general search interface.

For owner use, I want to make 'who' the per-list search interface (since
it's trivial to do and makes more sense from an access restriction
standpoint, and I suspect that most list owners are just grepping who
output anyway).

CVR> If the user needs address info from outside his domain, then I'd say
CVR> that's time for human intervention, and e-mail to the admin.

We do have to keep in mind that when security becomes an issue, the owner
can always do the job.  The idea is to offload work from the owner while
preserving security.

CVR> (another area where majordomo discloses addresses and shouldn't is the
CVR> bounces stuff.

I don't understand what you mean here.  Are you talking about the bounce
list?  I've never used it, but I have plans for a better way to do it.
Basically, when an address bounces, it is still subscribed but is put in
the 'bouncing' subscription class.  This gets no mail except for periodic
bounce probes.  The probes contain a token; if the token is returned, the
user is put back in their old subscription class.  See the bouncefilter
package for my inspiration.

 - J<


Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Is 'wh*ch' useful?
From: bill@ecology.bio.dfo.ca (Bill Silvert)
Next: Re: Is 'wh*ch' useful?
From: Dave Wolfe <dwolfe@risc.sps.mot.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Is 'wh*ch' useful?
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: Is 'wh*ch' useful?
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com