Sounds good to me. - Dave
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Glen Mazza <glen.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > My inclination right now is to just remove the "from address" from the UI > but keep it, ignored, in the database table (it's a nullable field anyway). > We can revisit the issue later if we want to resume blog-specific email > routing in 5.1+. How does that sound? > > Glen > > > On 06/29/2014 10:13 AM, Glen Mazza wrote: > >> Actually, the field is even more useless than what I wrote below. Again, >> email routing (#2 below) is configured at the blog administrator level, >> using the email address you configure in your Tomcat. ( >> roller-nore...@server.com perhaps or similar.) That I didn't change, >> it's been like that for some time now (before me being here apparently), >> perhaps as an early attempt to do ROL-1469 (provide privacy for the >> blogger's email address.) That's all you see in the "from", regardless of >> that field. >> >> What's changed is to satisfy ROL-1597 (still allow commenters who checked >> "all me to see new comments" even if the blogger doesn't care to see them), >> I shifted the right for commenters to see notifications from the blogger to >> the blog admin. So long as the blog admin allows notifications to be sent, >> and the individual blogger's template has a "notify me of new comments" in >> the comment entry field, the commenter will continue to see subsequent >> comments regardless of whether the blogger cares to see them. >> >> The blogger-level notifications checkbox has a changed meaning, it's >> independent of the "moderate comments" checkbox. If the blogger checks >> "moderate comments", the only emails he will get are notifications to >> approve an incoming comment. Whether he approves them or not, that's the >> only email he will see. But if he also checks "notify me of posted >> comments", he'll get a subsequent email telling him that he just approved >> the comment a few minutes ago, or, if he's not choosing to moderate >> comments, that will be his notification that a comment was immediately >> posted. >> >> Personally, I just need a notification that I need to approve a comment, >> so I would just choose "moderate", I don't need another email telling me I >> approved it (the current production Roller process that drives me nuts.) >> But some people like the noise of getting a subsequent email that they >> just approved the comment, so they can choose both "moderate" and >> "notification". >> >> Further, at the blog admin level, allowing notifications is kept separate >> from comment moderation. Notification is about just allowing emails that >> comments were posted (both to the blogger and to subscribers to the >> comments for a blog entry), shutting that off has no effect on moderation >> -- so long as the blog admin has configured a mail server and is allowing >> comments to be posted, the individual blogger may always choose comment >> moderation and get the moderation email, and the commenter will always get >> one email when the comment was approved. He or the commenters won't get >> subsequent notifications--greatly shrinking mail traffic--but the >> moderation function will always be in place, as it is a necessary feature >> when allowing comments. >> >> Glen >> >> >> On 06/29/2014 09:42 AM, Dave wrote: >> >>> I don't see the need for the change. Email address #1 is the address of >>> the >>> person (or mailing list) responsible for the weblog and #2 is the email >>> address to be used when sending comment notifications. These might be the >>> addresses of two different people (or mailing lists), one assigned to >>> manage the blog and one assigned to respond to emails re: comments. >>> >>> The current logic, as far as I can tell, is that comment notification >>> emails are sent from email address #2 unless it is blank in which case >>> the >>> comment notification is sent using the email address of the user who >>> created the weblog entry being commented upon. >>> >>> Have you tested to confirm that setting the from field does not work? If >>> it >>> does not, perhaps we should be using a reply-to field instead. >>> >>> - Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Glen Mazza <glen.ma...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Team, I'm working on ROL-2018, an email notification routing issue. >>>> On >>>> the blog settings page we define two email addresses: (1) for the blog >>>> owner and (2) for the default "from" address for all notifications, >>>> where >>>> (2) defaults to (1). The idea being, if (1) is sensitive/private, >>>> enter in >>>> (2) so everyone in the world sees (2) instead. I think this is >>>> superfluous >>>> -- if (1) is sensitive, just use (2) as the blog owner email address to >>>> begin with. I don't think we need to store two email addresses per >>>> blog, >>>> nor do we want to store sensitive email addresses anyway if we can >>>> avoid it. >>>> >>>> At any rate, Roller is not even using (1) or (2) for sending emails -- >>>> it >>>> doesn't know the email account password, so it couldn't anyway, unless >>>> we're to have Roller spoof email addresses. Roller uses the email >>>> address >>>> that the blog admin configures in his Java Mail setup (Tomcat >>>> server.xml, >>>> for example) for all message routing. So I'm thinking we should remove >>>> the >>>> "Default /from/ e-mail address for notifications" field on the blog >>>> settings page. WDYT? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Glen >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >
