EXCUSE me for my bad enlgish
Take me off this god damn mail list..or someone indicate WHO I can email
regarding this emailing list.
Is there no STANDARD UNSUBSCRIBE option?
Joe
On 5 Jan 2001, Amos Gouaux wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2001 22:56:48 +0000,
> >>>>> Cillian Sharkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (cs) writes:
>
> cs> Hi folks,
> cs> [Apologies for length of email]
>
> [Not being too familiar with NetBSD, there isn't much here I can
> comment on, but...]
>
> cs> - libwrap wasn't detected, even though it exists and works!
> cs> /usr/lib/libwrap.a, /usr/lib/libwrap.so* and /usr/include/tcpd.h are there
> cs> ok. passing --with-libwrap=/usr doesn't work either.
>
> I believe this has been fixed for the forthcoming 2.0.10.
>
> cs> - What do people recommend for "distribution lists" in an IMAP environment:
>
> I believe this has come up from time to time in the past, so you
> might check the archives. I don't think there is really a magic
> bullet approach, at least not for all.
>
> cs> - Use a shared folder with an email alias for posting to it and then use
> cs> ACLs to grant/deny people access the folder? Unfortunately, the Netscape
> cs> MUA only checks "Inbox" for new mail so it's easy to miss new mail in
> cs> other folders..
>
> We've experimented with this, and still use it in some cases. The
> problem, as you noted, is the notification of new mail. Few clients
> really handle this well, and so this approach has proven to be less
> popular, especially with those that have never used USENET, or those
> that feel their posts are sufficiently important that they must be
> "direct delivered". (Though, I'll concede that there are times this
> is actually necessary.)
>
> cs> OR
>
> cs> - Use dedicated mailing list software [like mailman with a web interface
> cs> for admin tasks] In this case mail would be delivered to Inbox. There is
> cs> also the concept of having "list owners", although this could be achieved
> cs> by giving someone the "a" right on the shared folder discussed above.
>
> And we do this as well. Actually, we've also experimented with a
> rather perverse melding of both, with mixed success. For various
> reasons, we're using Listar. One convenient thing about Listar is
> that the users file is plain text, which makes it very easy to
> scan. So with many of the high-volume/large member lists, we've
> created a shared IMAP folder to archive the list, much like what CMU
> does with info-cyrus. If you're merely a member of the list, you
> get read-only access. If you're a list moderator, you get
> read/write access.
>
> So, if someone wants to just rely on the shared folder to keep up
> with the mayhem, all they have to do is set their list configuration
> to be in 'vacation' mode. That way they won't get the list traffic
> in their inbox, but still retain access to the shared folder. I
> told you it was perverse.
>
> One convenient thing about this approach is that if they neglect to
> manage their inbox and run over quota, they are automatically put
> into vacation mode. Fortunately Listar does this for us without any
> extra effort.
>
> cs> - Finally, any good IMAP MUAs for Windows? Netscape 4.7x is a bit braindead
> cs> in many ways. I know there is Mulberry and I think Pegasus does IMAP too, but
> cs> the advantage over them with Netscape is:
>
> That topic is too opinionated for me to feel included to jump in,
> especially at this hour.
>
> cs> - The netscape UI is quite nice
> cs> - Our users are used to this (i.e. just click on the little "mail" icon!)
> cs> - Our current setup has netscape 'auto-configuration' so users never have to
> cs> setup their a/c. And they can't screw up the config either as it's "fixed"
> cs> on next login. In other words, "it just works" (TM) which is very handy
> cs> for us admins.
>
> If it works, use it. Personally, I'd like to see Netscape 7 support
> ACAP. Oh, I wasn't going to do that.
>
> --
> Amos
>
