LIST-UPDATE-L Archives

Archiver > LIST-UPDATE > 2006-08 > 1155422699


From: "Lauren Boyd" <>
Subject: Re: [LIST-UPDATE] Just so nobody can claim having had nocomplaints...
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 15:44:59 -0700
References: <44DE3C2C.6030702@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <44DE3C2C.6030702@yahoo.com>


Dear Listers:

Rod hashed and hashed and rehashed this already on the List Development list.
I don't see any reason to repeat that discussion here. His comments and
concerns WERE brought to the BETA list. I really would rather not have to
read a third round of this which has become a moot point.

Let it suffice that it will require extra reengineering of the
software, defeating
the purpose of going to something new and upgradable, will block more spam
from hitting the lists, etc.

The -L is not part of the list name. It was an artificial designator to force
Smartlist to do something that even it was not designed to do. To my
knowledge "ListServ" was not the software ever used at Rootsweb.com

Yes, there may be a wee bit of work for subscribers to edit their filters.
That will be a short lived experience. And much worth the trade off from
having software that was failing the system.

Can we move off thiis topic, Rod? Please. Asked and answered. The horse
will not smell any better getting beat on this list too.

Cheers,

Lauren

On 8/12/06, Rod Dav4is <> wrote:
> As some subscribers to this list know, I have strenuously objected
> on another list to the wholesale renaming of all the lists -- before
> being rudely cut off without warning in mid-sentence, as it were.
>
> 1. Renaming all the lists, e.g. from "LISTNAME-L" to "listname",
> virtually guarantees that all subscribers using their email client
> filter capabilities will need to change them.
> 2. If the lists had been all renamed to "listname-L" at least the -L
> subscribers would escape having to change their filters.
> 3. Even if this is just a few subscribers, why unnecessarily disturb
> them?
> 4. Making the new list names all be ...-L is easily within the
> capability of the new list processor (I checked), and simple as
> pie to do. No code changes required.
> 5. Far from "reducing the confusion" associated with the old -L/-D/-I
> nomenclature, this change ADDS to the confusion by introducing yet
> another name, since the old names are being retained for some reason.
> 6. In fact, having all lists be named ...-L would be a return to the
> previous state when ListServ was the processor. Nobody seemed
> confused that -L meant that it was a mail list.
> 7. What is the /advantage/ of the new nomenclature? I maintain that
> there is none.
>
> --
>
> Regards, Rod Dav4is / P.O. Box 118 / Hyde Park, NY 12538 / USA
> Genealogy, et Cetera: http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~dav4is/
> 447 ancestral & collateral families, mostly 17°-19° century
> New England & European roots. Total population: 108,300+
> Annex: http://www.gencircles.com/users/dav4is/
> email:
> "We have met the enemy, and he is us!"
> -Pogo Possum (1970)
>
>
> This list is reserved for discussion of topics related to the update of the mailing lists. List Admins should discuss admin-specific topics (like settings and tools) on the list.
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>


This thread: