# > Instead, I have always argued that the MLM's should become more
# > flexible in what they accept (my suggestions have been accepted to
# > some extent).
#
# I think this is one of the things that bothers me most: where
# MLMs could be more accomodating but aren't.  I'll use Majordomo
# as an example, not because it is bad but because I am familiar
# with it (Majordomo is the MLM I use).
#
# Majordomo wants a subscription message in the format
# "subscribe list [your@address]".  It explicitly checks for and rejects
# messages in the Bitnet style "subscribe list your name", with a
# message to the user that this is Majordomo and not Revised Listserv.
# Now, if it is going to go to that trouble, why not just accept the request?
 
Historical accident.  When I wrote it, Majordomo didn't have that
test.  After I installed it and started using it to run 30+ mailing
lists, I started getting lots of LISTSERV-style "subscribe" requests.
I was in a hurry, so I added code to simply reject these requests,
telling the user why.  The _right_ thing to do would have been to
subscribe the address determined from the headers, and send the user a
note saying "you goofed, but I've done what I think you wanted
anyway".
 
I'm a strong believer that you should tell folks what they're doing
wrong rather than do it for them, because if you do it for them,
they'll never learn.  This is a trivial enough case, though, that it's
probably OK to bend that rule.
 
# The reason I chose Majordomo is because it is in perl and is
# easy to customize.  It was a one line fix to quietly accept the
# Bitnet-style subscription request.  (Later I will fix it
# to give an explicit response stating that it ignored the "your
# name" part.)  It is another one line fix to accept "review"
# in addition to Majordomo's "who" command.  And so on.
 
I didn't add all the LISTSERV commands mainly because I didn't know
what they were.  I looked at the UNIX LISTSERV, and decided it was far
too complex; that's when I decided to write Majordomo.  I wasn't
trying to duplicate LISTSERV; I was trying to create something simple
that happened to provide much of the same functionality as LISTSERV.
 
On reflection, I should have done more research on LISTSERV and either
made Majordomo totally different or made it more compatible.  The sort
of half-way natural compatibility that's there now just annoys folks.
But, since I wasn't familiar with LISTSERV, and was on a very limited
timeline, I just charged ahead.  Mia culpa.  If you or your users
don't like Majordomo, use LISTSERV.
 
 
-Brent
--
Brent Chapman                                   Great Circle Associates
[log in to unmask]                           1057 West Dana Street
+1 415 962 0841                                 Mountain View, CA  94041