Re: subscriptions/unsubscrptions
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Joyce Miletic wrote:
This should not have this effect. Removing this line from accept file will just stop the digest from posting to the list.
OK, but will new subscribers be added to both accept and dist?
Are you having a problem with subscribers not being able to subscribe?
No. -- Baloo
hi, On 2002.02.20 12:16 Paul 'Baloo' Johnson wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Joyce Miletic wrote:
OK, but will new subscribers be added to both accept and dist?
nope, subscribers are always *only* added to the dist files, so that they always get messages from the list. If you delink the accept file, which contains the addresses of those allowed to post to the list, then you create what's called a closed list: selected people (in the accept file) can post, subscribers (in the dist file) only get messages Miquel -- Miquel E Cabanas ------------------------------------------------------ SeRMN, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (Miquel.Cabanas@uab.es) ------------------------------------------o-oo--ooo---ooo--oo-o--------
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Miquel Cabanas wrote:
If you delink the accept file, which contains the addresses of those allowed to post to the list, then you create what's called a closed list:
selected people (in the accept file) can post, subscribers (in the dist file) only get messages
Damn. So, how do I get it the digest version doesn't echo messages it's getting from undigested back at it? -- Baloo
"Paul 'Baloo' Johnson" <baloo@ursine.dyndns.org> writes: ...
Damn. So, how do I get it the digest version doesn't echo messages it's getting from undigested back at it?
In the digest list's rc.custom, set undigested_list to the full name of the normal list. Philip Guenther
"Paul 'Baloo' Johnson" <baloo@ursine.dyndns.org> writes:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Philip Guenther wrote:
In the digest list's rc.custom, set undigested_list to the full name of the normal list.
That was obvious.
So, that means doing so have solved your problem, or does it mean that you did so already and it didn't help? Note that versions of Smartlist before 3.14 didn't correctly handle the undigested_list variable, so you may need to upgrade or patch rc.submit. Philip Guenther
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Philip Guenther wrote:
So, that means doing so have solved your problem, or does it mean that you did so already and it didn't help? Note that versions of Smartlist
Done already.
before 3.14 didn't correctly handle the undigested_list variable, so you may need to upgrade or patch rc.submit.
For some reason that was still commented out, the msgid cache. I've fixed that and I'm waiting for someone to post something to see if the echo's still going on. -- Baloo
This should not have this effect. Removing this line from accept file will just stop the digest from posting to the list.
OK, but will new subscribers be added to both accept and dist?
The code in smartlist that updades the `dist' file updates *only* the `dist' file. If it is linked to some other file, the other file is also "updated", but because of it beink linked to `dist', not because smartlist updates the other file. Therefore if `dist' is not linked to any other file, no other file will be updated. It's clear now?
On 2002.02.20 13:43 Paul 'Baloo' Johnson wrote:
However, is there any method to keep digest from being able to post without unlinking dist and accept?
sorry if I missed the background of this thread, but could you describe more precisely what you intend to do? For instance, if you plan to have both the digested and undigested (regular hereafter) versions of a mail list, you should consider first the way they are implemented in SL, * the undigested (regular) version is meant for common use. If files dist & accept are linked, then it works as an open list (subscribers can post). If files dist & accept are independent, then it works as a closed list (subscribers get e-mail, but do not post) * the digested version is meant to distribute messages as a whole when the digested version is flushed (on the basis of a certain number of messages being achieved or some expiration time being ellapsed) depending to which version people subscribe they get individual messages immediately after posted (regular) or all measseges as a whole (digest). Note that by default, * the digested version is *only* meant for distributing messages, not for posting * messages posted to the regular version are diverted to the digested version, because the email address of the later is included in the dist file of the former. * subscribers to the digested version cannot post messages to the regular version (unless they subscribe to both list, which is nonsense) * the above facts can be altered by linking a new accept2 file in the regular version directory to the dist file in the digested version directory, and instructing the regular version to use the new accept2 file as well as the standard accept file (FAQs 2.16 and 4.10) If this doesn't answer your question, then, please, rephrase it so that we can better help you. Miquel -- Miquel E Cabanas ------------------------------------------------------ SeRMN, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (Miquel.Cabanas@uab.es) ------------------------------------------o-oo--ooo---ooo--oo-o--------
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Miquel Cabanas wrote:
sorry if I missed the background of this thread, but could you describe more precisely what you intend to do?
gc-d is subscribed to gc to provide digests for folks. gc-d gets a message from gc, and sends it back at gc. Result? gc members get dupes.
For instance, if you plan to have both the digested and undigested (regular hereafter) versions of a mail list, you should consider first the way they are implemented in SL,
No, I understand the implimentation, I don't get where I'm getting the echo.
Note that by default, * the digested version is *only* meant for distributing messages, not for posting
I realise this, hence the digested version sets the reply-to to the normal version.
* the above facts can be altered by linking a new accept2 file in the regular version directory to the dist file in the digested version directory, and instructing the regular version to use the new accept2 file as well as the standard accept file (FAQs 2.16 and 4.10)
Ooh, should do that, too, then. -- Baloo
At 10:02 AM -0500 2/20/02, Paul 'Baloo' Johnson is rumored to have typed:
gc-d is subscribed to gc to provide digests for folks. gc-d gets a message from gc, and sends it back at gc. Result? gc members get dupes.
They shouldn't, unless you're bypassing the code that checks the Message-ID: header field for duplicates. (SmartList is smart enough not to send out the same Message-ID: twice.) That is, gc-d is _supposed_ to send the message back to gc, since gc should check for a unique Message-ID: header field, and if it finds a duplicate, should NOT send out the mail a second time. (See rc.submit; search for "Eliminate duplicate submissions" to review the recipe.) But if it _doesn't,_ it should send out the mail (since the poster sent it to the digest list). Why it's not in your case, I couldn't hazzard a guess. Works peachie for me...did you change or eliminate the idcache_size variable in rc.custom? (Ok, maybe I could hazzard a guess.) Charlie
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 10:34:20AM -0500, Charlie Summers wrote:
That is, gc-d is _supposed_ to send the message back to gc, since gc should check for a unique Message-ID: header field, and if it finds a duplicate, should NOT send out the mail a second time. (See rc.submit; search for "Eliminate duplicate submissions" to review the recipe.) But if it _doesn't,_ it should send out the mail (since the poster sent it to the digest list).
We use an ancient version (3.10) at eskimo.com, so forgive me if this has all changed in more recent versions, but on our setup: The digest accepts posts ONLY from the list (and the maintainer, so I can forward things that confuse my quotation-removal recipes, which operate in digest/rc.local.s10). That is, the digest/accept file has just those two entries. So presumably, the digest can assume that the list has already done duplicate screening. The digest has its own dist file which is linked to list/accept2, so digest members can post, but they must post to the list. This makes sense to me, as the digest is comprised of list articles. Has this strategy changed in more recent versions? I've often thought it'd be nice if SL could be made clever enough to accept posts to the digest from legitimate subscribers, just silently passing them to the list, on the theory that the poster wasn't clever enough to realize the digest is a separate entity. Most of my subscribers eventually figure it out, but for some it's pretty painful... :) It's not something I've felt strongly enough to impliment myself. If it's in a newer SL version, I might lobby my ISP to install it. Jim
On 2002.02.20 16:02 Paul 'Baloo' Johnson wrote:
gc-d is subscribed to gc to provide digests for folks. gc-d gets a message from gc, and sends it back at gc. Result? gc members get dupes.
mmm... what's the content of gc-d dist file? using the default SL setup, * gc dist file should include all subscribers that want to post and get messages in a regular (undigested) way * gc dist should also contain the email address of the gc-d list, so that messages get forwarded to gc-d subscribers * gc-d dist should *only* contain subscribers that want to get digests (no posts allowed) * gc-d should NOT contain the email address of gc, otherwise all users will get digests. As for the loop that would result, SL should be able to detect and break it. * there should be no duplicates between the dist files of gc and gc-d (unless done on purpose) You should make sure gc-d is properly labelled as digest list (digest-flag on in gc-d rc.custom) and related to its partner regular list (undigested_list = gc-d@somewhere"). Check the section 3A of the SL manual (http://www.hartzler.net/smartlist/Manual.html) Miquel -- Miquel E Cabanas ------------------------------------------------------ SeRMN, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (Miquel.Cabanas@uab.es) ----
participants (6)
-
Charlie Summers -
Jim Osborn -
Miquel Cabanas -
Paul 'Baloo' Johnson -
Philip Guenther -
Santiago Vila