Barry Warsaw writes: > On Mar 20, 2016, at 08:15 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> >I wonder if we aren't over thinking here. Maybe I didn't associate a > >display name with my user record and my alternate address on purpose for > >my own reasons. Maybe when I subscribe my alternate address to some > >list, I do it because I don't want my preferred address or its display > >name associated with this subscription. > > > >I'm not sure we should be mining the data for things that the user may > >have intentionally not provided. > > That's an interesting point, thanks. I'm with Mark here. I think the right thing to do is to file an RFE with Postorius to have the "link new address" screen "suggest" the existing display names, but not automatically add any. > The intention in the model is that the user's display name can be > used as a fallback for any linked address that has no display name. Also have a "inherit user name" value in the list. Despite the way I lean above, this could be default. But definitely EIBTI (@aditya "explicit is better than implicit") -- we should not take None for "carte blanche". Steve _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
