On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 11:32:52AM -0400, Chris Devers wrote: > On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, David Cantrell wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:31:02AM -0400, Chris Devers wrote: > > > I think Paul's points are valid though. Why make an aptitute test out > > > of this? What's so great about software obscurity or pedantry? > > There's nothing good about obscurity, and little good about pedantry. > > Luckily, majordomo's interface is not obscure. > ...but you concede that it's pedantic? ;)
How can it be? It's people arguing about things that get pedantic. > > There's several excellent reasons to run majordomo. The biggest > > reason for me is that I needed to have perl on the machine anyway > > and had no other reason for installing python. That, and majordomo > > was easier to set up. > So, it was easier for you to install, but -- you seem to admit -- more > pedantic for users to interact with, but you don't care so that's fine. I admit no such thing. Users have to understand and obey simple instructions regardless of whether the list they're subscribing to is run by majordomo, mailman or ezmlm. > Uhh, right. Can you maybe give some more compelling reasons than that? > I still don't see the light here -- I still don't see why Majordomo is > the right solution for Alex's needs. You're not Alex so it doesn't matter. All I did was point out that mailman was not necessarily the best choice. > I still stick with the chorus: go with Mailman. It's Just Better. Very well, how would it be better for me? -- David Cantrell | Degenerate | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Willing to accept a lower economic "standard of living" in return for higher quality of life
