On Thu, 9 Apr 1992 13:47:46 +0200 Eric Thomas said:
>>Eric, might I suggest that you update listserv so that if it gets a
>>request for the old version of "listname LIST", that it also *checks*
>>the old version *if* the user's ID is not found in the new "soup"
>>version... :-)
>Sorry, but no. The system is designed so that vital data isn't lost
>forever when you screw up, it is not designed to provide optimal recovery
>time without local assistance for all possible types of errors. ...
>... It seems normal to have to
>resort to local assistance for this kind of errors. For the same reason
>that nobody would take an operating system allowing the use of your old
>login password for up to 1h after you change it seriously, I am not going
>to allow old passwords/owners to keep running the list for a time window
>long enough to avoid having to call local staff for assistance.
>
>In any case, you should have directed your request to Turgut and not me.
Firstly, yes, I should have contacted Turgut instead.
Secondly, I don't agree with your analogy with password setting on operating
systems. Most OSs that I know, ask you to confirm a password when you attempt
to change it. I just thought that something similar could be done, following
the reasonable guideline that:
When you attempt to make a change that will in future deny you
access to a service, that service should request confirmation.
So, my suggestion was to have listserv send back a message like this:
*******
Message from LISTSERV ..date..
You have altered ..listname.. LIST in a manner which will deny you
any further access to the list. If this was not your intention, then
you should immediately send the following message to listserv@..site..
CANCEL ..listname.. PW=XXXXXXXX
where XXXXXXXX is your original password.
If listserv receives the cancellation within one hour of the send date
of this message then the old ..listname.. LIST file will be restored
and the new file returned to you.
In any event, you may contact your system administrator for assistance.
*******
On the other hand, if you feel strongly that goofs like mine should only
be corrected by administrators, then I think listserv should reply that
a potential goof had occurred and that corrective measures (if required)
can only be handled by an administrator.
Finally I ask if listserv should really allow an owner to change the
ownership of a list. After all, ownership is usually granted (initially)
by systems administration and they should therefore be the only ones allowed
to change it. I was surprised that listearn (and therefore probably listserv)
actually ALLOWED such an operation.
--- Rotan Hanrahan.
|
