# > 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