Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 1:28 AM +0900 2006-01-30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
>> There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, perhaps it
>> was on mailman-developers, though. IIRC the consensus was "making
>> this more trouble than it's worth is not going to be easy".
>
> Th
At 1:28 AM +0900 2006-01-30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, perhaps it
> was on mailman-developers, though. IIRC the consensus was "making
> this more trouble than it's worth is not going to be easy".
There is a FAQ entry on how t
> "Jim" == Jim Popovitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jim> Hi all, I've been looking into TMDA (http://tmda.net) and got
Jim> to wondering if something like this (or a subset of it)
Jim> should be incorporated into Mailman.
There was a thread about this in the fairly recent past, p
Hi all,
I've been looking into TMDA (http://tmda.net) and got to wondering if
something like this (or a subset of it) should be incorporated into Mailman.
Here's my line of thinking:
What if Mailman had a means, similar to the current subscription
verification process, to verify postings to a
