[Mailman-Users] Re: remove this?

[Mike Noyes]

At 2001-05-09 13:29 -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
>Mike, thanks for the Eudora suggestions.  I'm going to create a
>README.USERAGENT file that collects this wisdom, and I'm going to add
>a FAQ entry pointing people to this file.  If anybody else has
>suggestions on settings for other MUAs please send them along.

Barry,
Thanks, but I can't take credit for them. Someone else posted the Eudora 
instructions in a message on a similar thread. I used them to create a FAQ 
for my list users.

https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=1465&group_id=13751

>But, Mailman could do a better job of conforming to RFC 2369.  E.g. it
>could suppress List-Post: for read-only lists, and it could get rid of
>the obsolete List-Id: header.  I'll work on this for Mailman 2.1.
>
>I still believe that Mailman is doing The Right Thing by supporting
>RFC 2369.  When the MUA vendors catch up, end users will benefit.

I agree. :)

>That said, we may have to invoke the 9th Zen of Python: Practicality
>beats Purity[1].  Whether that means adding for Mailman 2.1 a
>list-specific configuration option (-1) or a site-wide configuration
>variable (-0), I'm not sure.  I just wanted to say that while I still
>agree with Chuq and JC that this RFC is important to support, I'm not
>totally deaf to the cries of dismay from those of you who have to
>expend real dollars to deal with users on non-conformant MUAs.

I'm sure whatever you decide to do will be fine.

--
Mike Noyes <mhnoyes at users.sourceforge.net>
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/