Gre7g Luterman wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 05:34:52 -0500, "Jesse D. Guardiani"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

<snip>

>> I'm not so sure about that. It may be what you plan, but that doesn't
>> necessarily mean it NEEDS to be in there.
> 
> Well, sysadmins with virtual users using TMDA are going to want their
> pending directories cleaned so they don't fill up the disk.  What
> better tool should we put this functionality in?

contrib script or separate tmda-pending wrapper script. Make it robust
enough to handle system, vpopmail, and VMailMgr, but keep the GUI stuff
out.



<snip>

>> But if you DO choose to implement this functionality, you MUST provide
>> a way to lock this down at the system administrator's request so that
>> systems with limited disk space won't be overrun by pending emails. If
>> you're comfortable with that added level of complexity, then have at it.
> 
> Yup.  This has been discussed already.

OK. Fine by me.


> 
>> In addition, obviously there could be different levels of providing a
>> way to "lock this down at the system administrator's request". You
>> could provide a simple "do not let any users modify cron jobs" switch,
>> or you could take it any number of steps further by allowing the sys
>> admin to specify which domains can modify cron jobs, which domain
>> admins, which users's, etc...
> 
> I just plan to make it so you can lock it out in /etc/tmdarc.  Since
> the config file is Python code, the sysadmin can make the criteria for
> who can and who cannot change cron jobs as simple or as complex as
> s/he wishes.

Ok. fair enough, I guess. I'll just leave it off then.


> 
>> I haven't heard from Tim in a while. I wonder what he's up to, and if he
>> ever plans to finish the migration and integration of virtual user
>> code into the ~ expansion routines like he said he wanted to.
>> 
>> That would certainly make your job a good bit easier. You could then
>> treat virtual users just like system users, but I'm not sure that it's
>> really an implementable idea.
> 
> I would really like to encapsulate this sort of stuff in one central
> module.  That would be best from a design point of view.

I think so too. I don't think ~ expansion would work.


> 
>> How would you deal with overlapping system
>> and virtual user accounts?
> 
> I'm afraid I do not understand what you mean.

I'm talking about the ~ expansions here. Say you have two virtual users,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Which user does ~bob evaluate to?

(BTW, the ~ thing is not my idea, it's Tim's)


> 
>> I personally think that due to the nature of programs like tmda-ofmipd
>> and tmda-cgi it makes more sense to simply include a standard virtual
>> domain library that these programs can query when they need to accomodate
>> virtual users.
> 
> Yup.  We agree there.

Yippie. :)


> 
> Gre7g.

-- 
Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator
WingNET Internet Services,
P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605
423-559-LINK (v)  423-559-5145 (f)
http://www.wingnet.net

We are actively looking for companies that do a lot of long
distance faxing and want to cut their long distance bill by
up to 50%.  Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info.

_________________________________________________
tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers

Reply via email to