[Mailman-Developers] [Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>] Re: Bounceremoval parameters default values

[J C Lawrence]

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:04:14 -0700 
somuchfun  <somuchfun at atlantismail.com> wrote:

> The issue is not whether it was obvious or not, the issue is that this
> new feature cannot even be turned off, just changed to a different
> format.  Since there are many configurations out there that might not
> work with VERP I find introducing a feature that is on by default and
> that cannot be turned off causing more harm than doing good.

Without disagreeing with your point:

  At some point Mailman ends up in the position of pushing technical
  standard adoption (such as the RFC 2369 List-* headers).  No matter
  when the adoption decision is made someone will be unhappy.

  Plus addressing is not even close to new.  I'm aware of no production
  MTAs that don't support plus-addressing.  At what point should Mailman
  simply assume technical capability on the part of installation sites?
  Mailman already currently assumes a number of non-default things about
  the execution space, why not plus-addressing as well?

  When is the right time?

Remember:  You don't have to upgrade.

-- 
J C Lawrence
---------(*)                Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw at kanga.nu               He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/  Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.