On Jul 13, 2011, at 01:34 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >Barry Warsaw writes: > > > But maybe the OP has a different use case in mind and we could have a need > > for > > both a long-term, permanently failing retired lists, and shorter term, > > temporarily failing disabled lists. > >I don't really understand under what circumstances a list owner would >want to disable the *whole list* and at the same time leave retries up >to arbitrary MTAs out on the Internet. The poster may or may not get >a DSN. Etc, etc.
I agree. I think I like the term "retire" better than "disable" to more clearly designate a step in a list's life between active and deleted. A retired list would still exist, and people could (maybe?) still subscribe to it, etc. I think the core wouldn't treat retired lists much different than active lists except to either omit its aliases from regeneration, or give the appropriate LMTP code. One thing to think about is how MTAs like Exim will work since they don't use an alias file. >OTOH, I can imagine that for some purposes you might want a different >status code, and I don't see any good reason for making that >configurable and then restricting it to 5xx. Rather, document it as >"this SHOULD be a 5xx code (in the RFC 2119 sense, ie, with >sufficient reason it could be a 4xx code, but we don't know of any >examples offhand :-)." Do you really think it needs to be configurable? I mean, if we can't think of a reason to not make it 5xx, why not just wait for the first wishlist bug report? :) -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 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://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
