I am pretty sure allowing the raw email addresses to be available is
going to go over like a lead balloon here. Anything (however minor) to
help protect the users/clients email addresses is helpful despite what
others think. It is fine if someone considers the obfuscation that
Mailman uses is
On Aug 29, 2009, at 12:21 AM, Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
Yes. It is critical to keep user perception in mind. Specifically,
if you
don't keep email addresses off the global search engines, there will
be a
deluge of vocal complaints from users who neither care about nor
understand
the
On Aug 29, 2009, at 1:10 AM, Bernd Siggy Brentrup wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 18:03 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
What I'm thinking is that there should be a send me this message
link in the archive, which gets you a copy as it was originally sent
to the list. That let's you jump into a
On Aug 29, 2009, at 3:01 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Barry Warsaw writes:
What I'm thinking is that there should be a send me this message
link in the archive, which gets you a copy as it was originally sent
to the list. That let's you jump into a conversation as if you'd
been
there
On Aug 31, 2009, at 1:15 PM, C Nulk wrote:
I am pretty sure allowing the raw email addresses to be available is
going to go over like a lead balloon here. Anything (however minor)
to
help protect the users/clients email addresses is helpful despite what
others think. It is fine if someone
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Aug 31, 2009, at 1:15 PM, C Nulk wrote:
As for using robots.txt, hmm, it is not the legitimate search
engines I
care about, it is the search engines/crawlers that do not respect my
robots.txt file that I care about. If I had an effective way to
consistently
Barry Warsaw wrote:
Let's say I just joined the XEmacs development mailing list after a long
absence. I find a message in the archive from two years ago that is
relevant to an issue I'm having. I'd like to follow up to that message
using my normal mail toolchain, but I found the archive page
On Aug 31, 2009, at 3:00 PM, Dale Newfield wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
Let's say I just joined the XEmacs development mailing list after a
long absence. I find a message in the archive from two years ago
that is relevant to an issue I'm having. I'd like to follow up to
that message using
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Aug 31, 2009, at 1:15 PM, C Nulk wrote:
I am pretty sure allowing the raw email addresses to be available is
going to go over like a lead balloon here. Anything (however minor) to
help protect the users/clients email addresses is helpful despite what
others think.
Barry Warsaw wrote:
Now I can hit 'reply' and inject myself seamlessly into that 2 year
old thread.
As long as the mailing list name/address hasn't migrated/changed in
the interim...
Good point.
...perhaps the original message munged to ensure current accuracy of
the to/cc/reply-to
Mark Sapiro wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Aug 31, 2009, at 1:15 PM, C Nulk wrote:
As for using robots.txt, hmm, it is not the legitimate search
engines I
care about, it is the search engines/crawlers that do not respect my
robots.txt file that I care about. If I had an
On Aug 31, 2009, at 4:48 PM, David Champion wrote:
I'm going to embracing and extend something Barry suggested in
private mail. He suggested a list setting that permits signed-in
list subscribers to download raw archives if they have some
'archive-approved' status. What if that is a three-way
* On 31 Aug 2009, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Mailman will always still collect the raw data for messages sent to
the list. There are legitimate uses for allowing outsiders access
to that data (say, the list is moving and you want to migrate the
archives), so I think we always want to support
Barry Warsaw writes:
Let's say I just joined the XEmacs development mailing list after a
long absence.
Hey, welcome back! Do you plan to return to Supercite maintenance?wink
I find a message in the archive from two years ago that is relevant
to an issue I'm having. I'd like to
14 matches
Mail list logo
