Barry Warsaw wrote:
Does that make it worth it to add as a supported feature in the core? It
depends. What I would be very interested in -at least as a first step- are
ways to enable experimentation into such features by the addition of hooks and
APIs that allow third-party plugins that could s
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> I think that this is an instance where a huge amount of well-intended
> design and development effort will result in a "solution" that cannot
> provide what it intends to because underlying circumstances prevent it.
> And -- having studied
On Mar 15, 2017, at 09:47 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>What all of this means is that once a list passes N members, where
>we can debate about N, the probability that at least one of those
>members has already been compromised even before they've joined the
>list starts rapidly increasing.
That assu
On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:46:27 -0400
Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> I suggest that Mailman do nothing, because even if it solves all the
> problems that it can solve, all it will do is provide a thin veneer of
> security/privacy on top of a thoroughly rotten foundation. Yes, there
> will be small, limited
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:31:44PM -0500, J.B. Nicholson wrote:
> I understand there are more insecure devices on the Internet all the time
> and that's unfortunate, but I don't think it's avoidable. What do you
> suggest we do about this using Mailman (since this is Mailman-developers)?
I suggest
