Hi folks,
Every so often I consider mailing list software and then end up using Yahoo
Groups with its ease of use but adverts inserted into the mail.
My gut feeling is to use a perl based system - such as (I think) majordomo.
However I don't even thing that is what this mailing list uses does
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 10:15:27AM +0100, Alex McLintock wrote:
Hi folks,
Every so often I consider mailing list software and then end up using Yahoo
Groups with its ease of use but adverts inserted into the mail.
I don't see any adverts:
:0 f
* ^X-eGroups-Return
| /usr/bin/perl -0777pi
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 10:15:27AM +0100, Alex McLintock wrote:
Every so often I consider mailing list software and then end up using Yahoo
Groups with its ease of use but adverts inserted into the mail.
And sent to you directly - see their new privacy policy.
What are people's
Alex McLintock [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd like a basic web interface if possible...
Mailman. End of story.
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Starhttp://www.thehighwaystar.com
Interim Technical Director, Web
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Alex McLintock wrote:
I know very little about mail - not even what mail transport mechanism
we use
You use InterMail over ESMTP according to your headers (assuming you're
sending from the same computer as you'd want the list to run off of)
As many other people have
Alex McLintock wrote:
My gut feeling is to use a perl based system - such as (I
think) majordomo.
Well, for some values of perl... AFAIK, majordomo is written in perl4 and
not really maintained (BICBW).
Popular mailing list packages seem to be ezmlm (which, apparently, works
best if you
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Alex McLintock wrote:
My gut feeling is to use a perl based system - such as (I think) majordomo.
You won't really be wanting to do that.
However I don't even thing that is what this mailing list uses does it?
What are people's recommendations. I know very little about
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 11:51:40AM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote:
Alex McLintock wrote:
My gut feeling is to use a perl based system - such as (I
think) majordomo.
Well, for some values of perl... AFAIK, majordomo is written in perl4 and
not really maintained (BICBW).
Majordomo 2 is still
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 10:04:13AM +, the hatter wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Alex McLintock wrote:
My gut feeling is to use a perl based system - such as (I think) majordomo.
You won't really be wanting to do that.
Majordomo works just fine for me.
--
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 10:15:27AM +0100, Alex McLintock wrote:
Hi folks,
Every so often I consider mailing list software and then end up using Yahoo
Groups with its ease of use but adverts inserted into the mail.
Yahoo Groups's archives are an appalling adfest, IMO. So much so that it
Newton, Philip [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Popular mailing list packages seem to be ezmlm (which, apparently, works
best if you also run qmail as your MTA)...
You also enter the scary world of djbL
_Dave karma ezmlm
dipsy ezmlm has karma of -1
_Dave explain karma ezmlm
dipsy Positive: just fix
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 10:56:46AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
The big advantage of majordomo is that you can say to people who want
to subscribe, its majordomo just do the usual thing. This sets an
entry test for basic cluefulness. Ah, bitterness, Bl. would be proud
;-)
My feeling as a
* at 24/04 11:49 +0100 Roger Burton West said:
My feeling as a listmaster (since 1994 or so, list sizes up to about
200) is that anyone who has trouble following the instructions send
mail to address X with subject line Y is unlikely to have much to
contribute to a mailing list. This has
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:29:16AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
(I don't subscribe to the belief that software should be sufficiently
obscure/bureaucratic/enforce some protocol of interaction so as to act
as a barrier to entry for folk, as though the ability to send correctly
formatted email data
on 24/4/02 10:30 am, David Cantrell at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is a tool which does one thing and does it well. This is as it
should be. Archiving lists is trivial, and whilst I've never bothered
with it, I am told that majorcool (the webby interface) is just as
easy.
We use majordomo
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 12:35:17PM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:29:16AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
(I don't subscribe to the belief that software should be sufficiently
obscure/bureaucratic/enforce some protocol of interaction so as to act
as a barrier to entry
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:29:16AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 11:30:55AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:22:53AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
majordomo is old crufty not maintained.
None of which matter, because it WORKS.
FSDO WORKS --
David Cantrell wrote:
What could be easier than saying send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'subscribe foolist'
on their own in the message body?
What about people with mandatory company signatures and/or intrusive this
mail has been checked for viruses lines which they have no
What about people with mandatory company signatures and/or
intrusive this
mail has been checked for viruses lines which they have no
control over?
Makes the on their own rather difficult to obey since they
can't influence
the addition of the boilerplate.
IIRC, and it's been a while, MD
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:46:36AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
Is it then logical if someone's corporate environment restricts their
access to a particular version of an email client that doesn't send
text/plain (or does something a bit perverse like base64 encode
everything bypassing even
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 02:36:08PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
What could be easier than saying send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'subscribe foolist'
on their own in the message body?
What about people with mandatory company signatures and/or
* David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Some liberal whinner [;-)] wrote:
What about people with mandatory company signatures and/or intrusive this
Majordomo ignores such rubbish. And in my considerable experience of
there is also the end command (IIRC), a simple web search will
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:46:36AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 12:35:17PM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
If you are unable to send a message to
a specified address with a specified subject line, you are unlikely to
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 01:00:25PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
What could be easier than saying send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the words 'subscribe foolist' on their own in the message body?
Saying:
send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message
'subscribe' in the body. Or, if
--8t9RHnE3ZwKMSgU+
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
An entity claiming to be Nicholas Clark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
:=20
: I don't see any adverts:
:=20
: :0 f
: * ^X-eGroups-Return
: | /usr/bin/perl -0777pi -e
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Setting it up in the first place was a bit fiddly. Setting up mailman
in the first place is MORE fiddly from what I can tell from the docs,
cos mailman needs to be integrated with both the mail *and* the web
servers.
I tried it the other day, and it
Those of you at the emergency meet last night will already have heard the
many uses for barcode readers, but I've got a stack of second-hand readers
(gun style, not swipey) which finally arrived this morning. So, if you
want to catalogue your books, CDs, DVDs, girlfriends, or anything else
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:31:02AM -0400, Chris Devers wrote:
But Roger's imperfect memory here would keep him from subscribing,
wouldn't it? I take it then that he doesn't make the cut for you? That's
too bad, he seems like a smart guy to me, but hey it's your list to run.
It obviously
More book stuff..
Imagine I have one script, that outputs two different forms depending
on what $form the script has been called with. I mean, I could simply
require $table.pl to pull in the requisite print_form() function
(and the concomitant insert, update, delete functions).
Is OO overkill
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:31:02AM -0400, Chris Devers wrote:
I think Paul's points are valid though. Why make an aptitute test out
of this? What's so great about software obscurity or pedantry?
There's nothing good about obscurity, and little
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 11:32:52AM -0400, Chris Devers wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:31:02AM -0400, Chris Devers wrote:
I think Paul's points are valid though. Why make an aptitute test out
of this? What's so great about software obscurity
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Imagine I have one script, that outputs two different forms depending
on what $form the script has been called with. I mean, I could simply
require $table.pl to pull in the requisite print_form() function
(and the concomitant insert, update, delete
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 02:05:22PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
No, it is a testament to Roger's memory being less than perfect. The
instructions given for subscribing to majordomo lists are explicit about
what the user needs to do, so no confusion can possibly arise.
Actually, it's a testament
Mark Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is this what you were looking for?
Pretty much, ta!
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Starhttp://www.thehighwaystar.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture
Roger Burton West [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 02:05:22PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
No, it is a testament to Roger's memory being less than perfect. The
instructions given for subscribing to majordomo lists are explicit about
what the user needs to do, so no
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 05:10:33PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Should I
turn confirms off? I dunno.
If you do, you'll promptly get into every black-hole list that's still
running. See mail-abuse.org at interminable length...
R
Roger Burton West wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 05:10:33PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Should I
turn confirms off? I dunno.
If you do, you'll promptly get into every black-hole list that's still
running. See mail-abuse.org at interminable length...
I read the mail-abuse.org how to
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 05:57:17PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
In fact, I don't see how it would help spammers, although I can see how
it is/was used by pranksters, but that's different.
If you operate a mailing list which does not require confirmation of
subscription, you are deemed to be a
Roger Burton West [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 05:57:17PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
In fact, I don't see how it would help spammers, although I can see how
it is/was used by pranksters, but that's different.
If you operate a mailing list which does not require
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:43:07PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Not an answer to the question. How does it help _spammers_?
I didn't say that it did, merely that it would get you into black-hole
lists.
R
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:43:07PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Roger Burton West [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 05:57:17PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
In fact, I don't see how it would help spammers, although I can see how
it is/was used by pranksters, but that's
41 matches
Mail list logo
