From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 16:05 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Mailing list software I hate spamware! Not because I use it, but because other people do, and it put random subjects like "Yahoo! Messenger" in the subject line and software like Mariaaaaaaaaaachi or whatever this thing is using can't be configured to present it as "[HATE] Yahoo! Messenger" so I can tell that this one is a worthwhile message and not spam. So I can't automatically reply and get my comment about "why didn't the scurvy beggars just use Zephyr" included in the Yahoo! Messenger thread.
From: Richard Clamp Date: 16:07 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:05:26AM -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: > So I can't automatically reply and get my comment about "why didn't the > scurvy beggars just use Zephyr" included in the Yahoo! Messenger thread. In the interests of feeding hate, this squeaky wheel is going to remain without oil.
From: Gavin Estey Date: 16:21 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software On Wednesday, September 10, 2003 11:05 AM, Peter da Silva <peter@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > Not because I use it, but because other people do, and it put random > subjects like "Yahoo! Messenger" in the subject line and software like > Mariaaaaaaaaaachi or whatever this thing is using can't be configured > to present it as "[HATE] Yahoo! Messenger" so I can tell that this > one is a worthwhile message and not spam. Through the sheer power of Outlook Express' filters, all messages from this list magically arrives in a folder imaginatively titled "hates". I'm sure OE isn't the only email client that can work such wonders. Gavin.
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ask_Bj=F8rn_Hansen?= Date: 22:27 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software On Wednesday, Sep 10, 2003, at 08:05 America/Los_Angeles, Peter da Silva wrote: > Not because I use it, but because other people do, and it put random > subjects like "Yahoo! Messenger" in the subject line and software like > Mariaaaaaaaaaachi or whatever this thing is using can't be configured > to present it as "[HATE] Yahoo! Messenger" so I can tell that this > one is a worthwhile message and not spam. I hate mailing list software that is (configured to) waste valuable screen real estate on duplicating information easily found elsewhere. - ask
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 22:49 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > I hate mailing list software that is (configured to) waste valuable > screen real estate on duplicating information easily found elsewhere. I hate software that doesn't let you configure it to do what you want, wther you want to duplicate information on the subject line or run layers of scary ad-hoc filters to lose your mail.
From: Juerd Date: 22:52 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva skribis 2003-09-10 16:49 (-0500): > I hate software that doesn't let you configure it to do what you want, > wther you want to duplicate information on the subject line or run > layers of scary ad-hoc filters to lose your mail. Is matching on "List-Id: hates-software" a scary filter? Juerd
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 22:56 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > > I hate software that doesn't let you configure it to do what you want, > > wther you want to duplicate information on the subject line or run > > layers of scary ad-hoc filters to lose your mail. > Is matching on "List-Id: hates-software" a scary filter? Depends on how many lists you're on, each of which has a different line that you have to match, some of which conflict. % wc ~/.ezfilter ~/.procmailrc 167 691 6757 /home/peter/.ezfilter 186 265 2135 /home/peter/.procmailrc 353 956 8892 total "It's only one more line" Yeh, that's what the other two-hundred-or-so blokes said.
From: Simon Cozens Date: 22:59 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva: > Depends on how many lists you're on, each of which has a different line > that you have to match, some of which conflict. I'm surprised nobody's wrote a Perl module or something to make this sort of thing painless.
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 11:29 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > I'm surprised nobody's wrote a Perl module or something to make this sort of > thing painless. I have. I called it "ezfilter". That's what I'm using there. It sucks, like all software, which is why it's not published.
From: Simon Cozens Date: 11:39 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva: > I have. I called it "ezfilter". That's what I'm using there. > It sucks, like all software, which is why it's not published. use Mail::Audit qw(List); $item = new Mail::Audit(); $item->list_accept()||$item->accept();
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 13:09 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > > I have. I called it "ezfilter". That's what I'm using there. > > It sucks, like all software, which is why it's not published. > use Mail::Audit qw(List); $item = new Mail::Audit(); > $item->list_accept()||$item->accept(); That's so much easier than what I'm using, clearly: list hate =hates-software rule hate "list-id" "hates-software" What sucks about ezfilter? Well, mostly that it doesn't do delivery, it's called from procmailrc and returns a list name, and procmail does the actual delivery. Which is too many layers of software for me to feel right about releasing it. One of these days I'm going to make it generate the procmail rules from the ezfilter file, so there's only one extra program in the critical path just waiting to fail. That might reduce the suck enough... But sticking line-noise.pl in the loop? I may be crazy...
From: Juerd Date: 13:18 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva skribis 2003-09-11 7:09 (-0500): > > use Mail::Audit qw(List); $item = new Mail::Audit(); > > $item->list_accept()||$item->accept(); > But sticking line-noise.pl in the loop? I may be crazy... 300+ lines .ezfilter+.procmailrc versus 2 lines of Perl "line noise" You're right. Having Perl handle this would be madness indeed. Juerd
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 13:24 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > 300+ lines .ezfilter+.procmailrc > versus > 2 lines of Perl "line noise" Those two lines will automatically handle a couple of hundred different sets of ad-hoc headers and tags that different bits of software use? Amazing.
From: Yoz Grahame Date: 13:57 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva wrote: >>300+ lines .ezfilter+.procmailrc >>versus >>2 lines of Perl "line noise" > > > Those two lines will automatically handle a couple of hundred different > sets of ad-hoc headers and tags that different bits of software use? > > Amazing. Are you still being sarcastic, or have you actually bothered to look at the Mail::Audit and Mail::ListDetector docs yet? -- Yoz
From: Juerd Date: 13:58 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva skribis 2003-09-11 7:24 (-0500): > > 300+ lines .ezfilter+.procmailrc > > versus > > 2 lines of Perl "line noise" > Those two lines will automatically handle a couple of hundred different > sets of ad-hoc headers and tags that different bits of software use? It uses Mail::ListDetector, which detects these formats by default: Mailman Ezmlm Smartlist Listar Ecartis Yahoogroups CommuniGatePro Listbox RFC2919 Fml RFC2369 Majordomo You can write your own plug-ins if you wish. > Amazing. Yes, it is. Juerd
From: Earle Martin Date: 14:17 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 02:58:56PM +0200, Juerd wrote: > It uses Mail::ListDetector, which detects these formats by default... Wot no Siesta?
From: Simon Cozens Date: 15:17 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Earle Martin: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 02:58:56PM +0200, Juerd wrote: > > It uses Mail::ListDetector, which detects these formats by default... > Wot no Siesta? Siesta is RFC compliant, so it looks just like something else which is pretending to be RFC compliant.
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 15:21 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > > Those two lines will automatically handle a couple of hundred different > > sets of ad-hoc headers and tags that different bits of software use? > It uses Mail::ListDetector, which detects these formats by default: > > Mailman > Ezmlm > Smartlist > Listar > Ecartis > Yahoogroups > CommuniGatePro > Listbox > RFC2919 > Fml > RFC2369 > Majordomo Then it sounds like it contains more than two lines of line noise. I suspect that it's a bit longer in total than my ezfilter and procmail put together, yes? I don't have any Perl in my mail setup yet, and I'm in no hurry to change that.
From: Juerd Date: 17:04 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva skribis 2003-09-11 9:21 (-0500): > > > Those two lines will automatically handle a couple of hundred different > > > sets of ad-hoc headers and tags that different bits of software use? > > It uses Mail::ListDetector, which detects these formats by default: > > [...] > Then it sounds like it contains more than two lines of line noise. I > suspect that it's a bit longer in total than my ezfilter and procmail > put together, yes? Probably, but is size the problem, or maintainability? You don't have to change anything in the modules themselves. Just like how you don't have to change Procmail's source in order to use it. > I don't have any Perl in my mail setup yet, and I'm in no hurry to change > that. If you feel comfortable by adding lines to config files all the time, and maintaining those large files which you have to build yourself, by all means continue to do so. But if you do, don't whine about it. Adding "only one more line" (re <20030910215655.34BCF41473@xxxxxxx.xx.xxxxxxx.xxx>) each time is YOUR choice :) Juerd
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 17:43 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > Probably, but is size the problem, or maintainability? The complexity, and the fact that complexity is in a scripting language, but more the fact that the complexity is necessary because there are all these different mailing lists with different ad-hoc header lines that have to be parsed. I was mistaken about this list being part of the problem... it's clearly part of the solution. That just means I now hate all the other mailing list software more. Especially Majordodo, though every month on Mailman Day it gets a special place in my heart.
From: Simon Cozens Date: 15:17 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva: > Those two lines will automatically handle a couple of hundred different > sets of ad-hoc headers and tags that different bits of software use? > > Amazing. Yup. Of course, this is because those "two lines" use several thousand lines of Perl modules, but that's by the by.
From: Juerd Date: 23:00 on 10 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Peter da Silva skribis 2003-09-10 16:56 (-0500): > > > I hate software that doesn't let you configure it to do what you want, > > > wther you want to duplicate information on the subject line or run > > > layers of scary ad-hoc filters to lose your mail. > > Is matching on "List-Id: hates-software" a scary filter? > Depends on how many lists you're on, each of which has a different line > that you have to match, some of which conflict. I'm sure you can find a lot of lines that are very common and matchable using one single match. > "It's only one more line" > Yeh, that's what the other two-hundred-or-so blokes said. They were right. Juerd
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 11:46 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software > > "It's only one more line" > > Yeh, that's what the other two-hundred-or-so blokes said. > They were right. Bull fucking shit. THIS is the attitude that leads to software bloat. It's only one ore file, one more configuration tool, one more file requestor, one more megabyte, and when you have hundreds of people saying the same thing you end up with Windows. Or Gnome. Or Mac OS X. Or Mozilla. Or Notes. Or... whatever your hate is justifiably directed at this week.
From: Richard Clamp Date: 11:57 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 05:46:20AM -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: > > > "It's only one more line" > > > Yeh, that's what the other two-hundred-or-so blokes said. > > > They were right. > > Bull fucking shit. Look. We're trying to be RFC-compliant here[0], and you're the only person having a problem with it. This means you can take your objections and shove them as far as you feel is appropriate. I hate the User 0.01 wetware. It's clearly a ratty piece of shit with myopia. [0] RFC 2919 - List-Id: A Structured Field and Namespace for the Identification of Mailing Lists. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2919.html March 2001. Get with the program.
From: Simon Cozens Date: 12:23 on 11 Sep 2003 Subject: Re: Mailing list software Richard Clamp: > Look. We're trying to be RFC-compliant here[0], and you're the only > person having a problem with it. Aggressive RFC compliance is a double-edged sword, as anyone who's ever tried to write an IRC client by looking at the spec ought to know.
Generated at 10:27 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi