[Nanog-futures] It's Mailman, and they aren't going to make these changes

[Lynda]

Joe Abley wrote:

> On 8 May 2008, at 09:57, <michael.dillon at bt.com>  
> <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>If the NANOG list sprouted a reply-to header, I'd be very unhappy.
>>
>>To echo an earlier comment, how much development work would be
>>involved in allowing list members to individually specify whether
>>they want:

> Then we just have to argue about what the defaults should be! :-)

At the risk of invoking a long and interminable thread on Mailman 
itself, I'll point out that the developers have a list of changes that 
they're working on, none of which include such interesting features. 
Mailman is good because it has some features that are handy (such as the 
ability to strip mime and attachments), and because it's relatively easy 
to configure. Some of the defaults are meant for a less, shall we say, 
sophisticated audience.

On the other hand, what seems to our friend Michael to be a reasonable 
request is going to be met with stony silence on the part of the Mailman 
team. The FSF would like you to call it GNU Mailman (but nobody does). 
It does what it does. It's in Python, not really that hard to modify, 
but then, branching off and supporting a home-grown version seems 
counterproductive to using a well-known and reasonably well supported 
list manager.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Mailman

Oh, and +1 on no Reply-to rewriting as well.

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei