--On 28 July 2006 21:31:29 -0500 Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 5:36 PM -0400 2006-07-28, James Ralston wrote: > >> I admit that this algorithm isn't perfect. But I think it's better >> than what Mailman does currently, which is to ignore the status field >> entirely. > > Unfortunately, there are a whole host of seriously broken MTAs out > there, and seriously broken configurations of otherwise good MTAs, > and many sites return totally bogus status codes. I don't see how that could create a problem. The worst thing that could happen is that someone remains subscribed to a list when they should not. Alternately, they could be unsubscribed because their MTA is returning the wrong error codes - but then that would give their postmaster a good reason to fix the error codes. In this case, they'd be unsubscribed as things stand anyway. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
