next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects
On Jun 19, 2:21pm, Michael Smith wrote:
} On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, David L. Potter wrote:
}
} > Our new majordomo configuration now uses standard zmailer aliases for the
} > list-owner, list-approval, etc.. We've made associated changes to the
} > mailing list creation scripts and as part of our changes we converted
} > all our old majordomo aliases to zmailer aliases...
}
} I think we could actually eliminate all ZMailer customizations having to
} do with majordomo (just insert pipe and :include: aliases for each mailing
} list).
Yes, most likely. This is canonical way of setting up majordomo.
} > Unfortunately we haven't (yet) upgraded the 'mailing list update' script
} > yet. (I've been changing the list-owner aliases, etc. manually (using root
} > privileges to edit the aliase file))
}
} The mailing list owner aliases could just be :include:s of files with a
} list of owners for the mailing list, one to a line, which could be edited
Hmm, this would work. But, it would mean an extra unnecessary
indirection when mail is sent to the list owners, which shouldn't be
very often, so this shouldn't be a major concern. The other thing is
that it means an extra file to maintain.
} (either by a root cron job, or directly by http if ZMailer's security
} checks are OK with the files not being owned by user daemon)
It should be. Mailing lists are quite often owned and maintained
by an individual.
} > - we'll put together the necessary information/tools to upgrade existing
} > sites to the current Chebucto zmailer/majordomo configuration. This will
} > likely be part of CSuite 1.1 and may be more manageable as part of a
} > general upgrade CSuite....(?)
}
} I think that's the way we should go for CSuite 1.1.
I would agree.
}-- End of excerpt from Michael Smith
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects