On 19 Dec 1997, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> [...]
>
> Now that I have the MIME handling I need, I get to work on resend some
> more. First up (for this weekend) is message approval. MIME makes this
> hugely complex. Here are some possibilities I'd like to support, but I'd
> like comments. (I intend to use only the token stuff and bypass the
> old-style stuff altogether for my lists, but you need the other things if
> you want to edit messages).
>
> Approval types (i.e. the message doesn't bounce at all)
> ------------------
>
> token
> When a message bounces it generates a token. The owner accepts the token
> and the message is approved.
>
> header
> The good old Approve: header. If it's there and the password is valid,
> the message is approved.
>
> attachment
> If first part just has the line Approve: password token and the other
> part is of type message/rfc822, the message is extracted and sent. (This
> means that well-behaved mailers be able to just forward the message,
> adding the Approve: line.)
>
> post command
> You can send a command like: approve password post list <<END and include
> an entire message afterwards. Or you can attach the message and do
> approve password post list <@. Of you can stuff the message in a file
> and use the shell interface. Whee.
>
> body
> Approve: in the body, possibly followed by headers. If no headers,
> remove the approve line and use the headers of the message. If headers,
> reparse starting from the next line. (This is 1.94.x behavior, and is
> painful to deal with.)
> If the Approve: line looks like Approve: password token, the token is
> removed from the list and acknowledged as being approved. Otherwise the
> token that was generated when the message bounces will have to time out.
>
> But what does "body" mean? If we have a multipart message, where do we
> look? The body of the first part? In the preamble? Somewhere else? It
> starts to get complicated, and I can't keep track of all of the
> implications.
We are absolute beginners with Majordomo (1.94.x) and have no experience
with version 2. So I have probably misunderstood, and may be speaking
grossly out of turn.
Irrespective of MIME, the approval mechanism has always seemed somewhat
tortuous.
Is it not possible for Majordomo to store the message internally?
Meanwhile it sends a request for approval to the moderator, with a
reference tag. The moderator's reply would simply contain (in principle!)
(1) this tag, (2) an action and (3) suitable authorisation (password,
whatever). On receipt of the message, Majordomo checks the authorisation
and tag, winkles its copy of the message (with preserved MIME) out of its
internal store and acts on it (e.g. forwards to the list).
[ OK , it would then need some mechanism to issue reminders to lazy
moderators and eventually time-out. And the moderator would be unable to
edit the message. (But how necessary is such a facility to most of the
moderators most of the time?) Doesn't it make the user interface much
easier and handle the MIME problem on 99% of occasions? ]
Sounds horribly simple, so I must have completely misunderstood the
problem, for which my apologies. (I was simply trying to stand back from
all the details and re-identify the real problem(s) to be solved!)
--
: David Lee I.T. Service :
: Systems Programmer Computer Centre :
: University of Durham :
: Phone: +44 191 374 2882 (ddi) South Road :
: Fax: +44 191 374 7759 Durham :
: Internet: T.D.Lee@durham.ac.uk U.K. :
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
