[Mailman-Users] Sending a human message to the LISTNAME-requestaddress.
Roger Pe?a Escobio
roger at infomed.sld.cu
Sat Mar 20 21:47:42 CET 1999
From: Dan Delaney <Dionysos at Dionysia.org>
To: mailman-users at python.org <mailman-users at python.org>
Date: Friday, March 19, 1999 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Sending a human message to the
>> I like LISTSERV/ListProc model better, where there is a
>> single address for the server, and all list addresses are really
>> unique for that list. But I don't know if we're in a position to
>I like that approach as well. But some people like it the other way.
>That's one of the nice things about majordomo, it goes both ways (so
>to speak :-). If I have a majordomo list called "mylist", the
>someone can subscribe one of two ways. They can send a message to
>"majordomo at mydomain.com" with "subscribe myemail at anotherdomain.com"
>in the message, or they can send a message to
>"mylist-request at mydomain.com" with just "subscribe" in the message.
>That's awefully nice. Mailman, however, limits the user to
>the latter method, making "mailman at mydomain.com" go to the Mailman
>administrator. I think it would make more sense to just stick with
>"mailman-owner at mydomain.com", or even add
>"mailman-admin at mydomain.com" and make "mailman at mydomain.com" an
>address for sending commands to the user. If this is supposed to
>replace majordomo, that's what a lot of majordomo users are used
> As far as "mylist-request at mydomain.com" goes, I don't see a
>problem with that list going to the server. I think "mylist-owner"
>is meant for messages to a human. You are sending a "request" to the
>server when sending to "mylist-request", and sending a message to
>the owner of the list at "mylist-owner".
I AGREE WITH YOU, completely, in all that you say
thank Dan, you say what i wan to say :-)
More information about the Mailman-Users