Surely the requirements of FoRK aren't that different from every other
mailing list on the planet. I know we like to flatter ourselves thus,
but surely it's either the case these are problems that have already
been solved elsewhere or alternately that our solutions to them have
applicability beyond the confines of FoRK (in which case we should grab
the mailman sources (or whatever) and work out how to roll in, e.g. auto
mutating name mangling).
I'm not saying that this is not a valid subject for debate, but given
that mailing lists have been around since the year dot (com) are we not
at risk of reinventing not just the wheel, but perhaps the whole damn
Anyway my 10p would be that people should be able to provide a line of
Perl when their membership is accepted which will subsequently be
used to munge their email address. That way everyone gets to choose
their own translation.
Mine could be
While I'm rambling on, is there no widely accepted header of the form
for use in circumstances like this?
 Actually, if I ruled the world it would be a condition of
Strata Rose Chalup wrote:
> Sounds like there are lots of folks who don't want address xforms; I'd
> take them if offered and obvious, but not at the expense of other folks
> not wanting them.
> How about a "fork-xform" alias, similar to fork-noarchive? If you post
> to fork using that alias, your email addrs embedded get transformed and
> reposted to fork.
> Strata Rose Chalup [KF6NBZ] strata "@" virtual.net
> VirtualNet Consulting http://www.virtual.net/
> ** Project Management & Architecture for ISP/ASP Systems Integration **
-- Andy Armstrong, Tagish
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 08:04:36 PDT