Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 11:43:33 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Auto-reponse to "From" address?

At 12:43 -0500 30/8/1997, Paul DuBois wrote:

>I'll second that.  What does it mean?  Does "would anyone like a copy..."
>mean "would anyone like AutoShare's behavior to be that a copy..."?

It means that if an address is in the body of a mail sent to an
auto-response service, should that address then receive a copy of the mail.
If you are mentioned in that body, would you like see it yourself and given
the chance to respond personally? It goes to the issue of follow-up mails
by various individuals, which adds a human touch to an automated response
service.



Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:53:02 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: Re: Auto-reponse to "From" address?

Mikael Hansen wrote:

> It means that if an address is in the body of a mail sent to an
> auto-response service, should that address then receive a copy of the mail.
> If you are mentioned in that body, would you like see it yourself and given
> the chance to respond personally? It goes to the issue of follow-up mails
> by various individuals, which adds a human touch to an automated response
> service.

Another option would be to send a response to anyone whose address is
Cc:'d in the original.

So they get a copy of the request and the response.

( :-])  James

Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 17:04:15 -0700
From: Robert Orenstein <rlo at perforce dot com>
Subject: Re: X-List headers

>All kidding aside and focusing on the RFC headers: what do you all think of
>the X-List headers? Do you something feel that some of your lists may not
>need all of them? Have your subscribers uttered any misgivings?

I know that this question was asked a while ago, but I was on
vacation and just read it.

My mailing list consists mostly of users who haven't used mailing
lists before. They don't complain, but they don't have anything to
compare it to. The few experienced users on the list HAVE complained
about it; they're on other mailing lists and haven't seen anything
like this before. A few have asked why the headers are there; I've
had to answer that we don't really need them, but that there's nothing
I can do about it.

Is my answer in fact accurate? Is there some way to remove them that
I've missed? Or if this isn't possible, which was the last release
that didn't contain this feature?

BTW, this is my ONLY qualm about AutoShare. Other than this, it's
worked beautifully.

Robert Orenstein



Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:52:24 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: X-List headers

At 17:04 -0700 30/8/1997, Robert Orenstein wrote:

>My mailing list consists mostly of users who haven't used mailing
>lists before. They don't complain, but they don't have anything to
>compare it to. The few experienced users on the list HAVE complained
>about it; they're on other mailing lists and haven't seen anything
>like this before.

The X-List headers are part of a Mail List Specification Headers package,
which at this time, I believe, is a formal draft, probably soon to become
an RFC (Request For Comments: Internet documents that detail protocol
standards, procedures and general information). The package deals with URLs
in RFC headers, and there has been lots and lots of talk about it all for
some months now on the list-header list.

>A few have asked why the headers are there; I've had to answer that we
>don't really need them, but that there's nothing I can do about it.
>
>Is my answer in fact accurate? Is there some way to remove them that
>I've missed? Or if this isn't possible, which was the last release
>that didn't contain this feature?

Yes, you can suppress some or all in the current 1.4b8, if you so desire.
In the Admin (b7), choose the Lists windows and then click the More List
button. See the balloon help for the Suppress RFC headers field. If you
enter the string 123456789 in the text field, maximum suppression has been
reached. Some of the headers are quite useful, and so my suggestion is that
you suppress selectively.

>BTW, this is my ONLY qualm about AutoShare. Other than this, it's
>worked beautifully.

Thanks!



Subject: Re: Auto-reponse to "From" address?
From:  Roger_Booth at pubshop.demon.co dot uk
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 13:26:39 +0100

*This message was sent using a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) FC Gateway*
bounce at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk,CommuniGate writes:
>Is there a away of configuring the auto-response requests to reply to
>the "From" address rather than the "reply-to". There seem to be so many
>users out there who have had no reason to set their reply-to address
>correctly until they come across an auto-res

While the RFC From and To (and optionally the RFC Reply-To) are updated in
standard AutoShare auto-response mails, AutoShare uses the original
envelope sender (not, say, the original RFC Reply-To) as the returned
envelope recipient, which determines where the mail is sent to. (It may be
added that if the RFC From contains the string "by way of", the new
envelope recipient is updated based on the new RFC To.)

Thanks for the reply, but I still don't understand.
Can AutoShare auto-response emails be made to go to the "from" address in the incoming message rather than any other address? It would be very good for me as I have users who I can reply to if they send me email but cannot get a reply from my auto-respons
e system. Is it possible to have a check box in AutoShare than makes the replied go to the incoming "from" address?

Roger Booth

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 18:32:58 +0100
From: james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk (James Berriman)
Subject: Re: Auto-reponse to "From" address?

At 1:26 pm 31/8/97, Roger_Booth at pubshop.demon.co dot uk wrote:

>Thanks for the reply, but I still don't understand.
>Can AutoShare auto-response emails be made to go to the "from" address in
>the incoming message rather than any other address? It would be very good
>for me as I have users who I can reply to if they send me email but cannot
>get a reply from my auto-response system. Is it possible to have a check
>box in AutoShare than makes the replied go to the incoming "from" address?

There are two issues here.

One is the issue of replying to the From: address, which Mikael could
implement for you.

The second is more serious, and involves the fact that your users' email
setup is quite simply broken. Every smtp mail message should have a valid
return address in the mail envelope, so that error messages can be returned
to the actual sender, whatever the From: address may say.

The fact that these people don't receive responses from AutoShare indicates
that they will never get a notification if their mail cannot be delivered
for any reason.

This is very bad, and I would encourage them to get it fixed.

( :-])  James



Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 11:21:30 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Auto-reponse to "From" address?

At 13:26 +0100 31/8/1997, Roger_Booth at pubshop.demon.co dot uk wrote:

>>Is there a away of configuring the auto-response requests to reply to
>>the "From" address rather than the "reply-to". There seem to be so many
>>users out there who have had no reason to set their reply-to address
>>correctly until they come across an auto-res
>
>While the RFC From and To (and optionally the RFC Reply-To) are updated in
>standard AutoShare auto-response mails, AutoShare uses the original
>envelope sender (not, say, the original RFC Reply-To) as the returned
>envelope recipient, which determines where the mail is sent to. (It may be
>added that if the RFC From contains the string "by way of", the new
>envelope recipient is updated based on the new RFC To.)
>
>Thanks for the reply, but I still don't understand.
>Can AutoShare auto-response emails be made to go to the "from" address in
>the incoming message rather than any other address?

They do. My response to the question was that AutoShare uses the original
envelope sender as the returned envelope recipient, which determines where
the mail is sent to.

It of course depends on how you define the "from" address. A mail contains
two "from" addresses: the envelope sender and the RFC From. The RFC From
doesn't become more real just because it is visible when receiving the mail
using an e-mail client such as Eudora. The real "from" address is located
in the hidden envelope.

>It would be very good for me as I have users who I can reply to if they
>send me email but cannot get a reply from my auto-response system.

My response to this question was that if the RFC From contains the string
"by way of", the new envelope recipient is updated based on the new RFC To.
So if for some reason a user cannot get a reply from your auto-response
system and sends the mail to you instead, you perform a simple Redirect in,
say, Eudora.

Your mail, which contains "by way of" in the RFC From, contains your
address in the envelope sender and the user's address in the RFC From, and
so AutoShare will return the auto-response to the user rather than to you.

Keep in mind though, that this way of doing it applies the user's RFC From
rather than the user's envelope sender, which is normally used for standard
auto-responses. If the user doesn't receive an auto-response by
communicating directly with the auto-response server, then proper
configuration is needed at the user's end.



Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 17:30:09 +0200
From: cReverd at Xon-Xoff dot com (Christophe Reverd)
Subject: Rebuilding a correct alias list ?

Hi team,

Here's my trouble : Sometimes a user receives a test mail from the list
server because there's a trouble on the alias list. In fact some mails are
sent to a mail server for a user on another domain name ... !

Everythink seems to be okay from the user side. I deleted and asked him to
resend a sub mail. I've to deal with the same difficulty.

Is there a way to rebuilt the current AutoShare alias list ?
Does it make sens for you ? Any idea to resolve this point ?

May be should I send you one of these mail report Mikael?

Thanks for your help.


Christophe Reverd
--
Xon-Xoff, des solutions Internet cles en main pour chaque budget
Pour en savoir plus http://www.Xon-Xoff.com et Info at Xon-Xoff dot com



Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:36:29 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Rebuilding a correct alias list ?

At 17:30 +0200 1/9/1997, Christophe Reverd wrote:

>Here's my trouble : Sometimes a user receives a test mail from the list
>server because there's a trouble on the alias list.

Is the "test mail" the kind which tests for a potential bounce? There is
probably no connection to the subscriber alias list as AutoShare uses it
for little else than when unsubscribing.

>In fact some mails are sent to a mail server for a user on another domain
>name ... !

I seem to remember that something like this relating to test bounces was
fixed a long time ago. Which version are you using?

>Is there a way to rebuilt the current AutoShare alias list ?

No. Once the message file has been processed, the information is gone
(except for the alias list file).



Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 09:46:16 +0200
From: cReverd at Xon-Xoff dot com (Christophe Reverd)
Subject: Re(2): Rebuilding a correct alias list ?

> I seem to remember that something like this relating to test bounces was
> fixed a long time ago. Which version are you using?

v1.4b8 on listserv at magnetik dot com for the IACCHOS list.

> >Is there a way to rebuilt the current AutoShare alias list ?
> No. Once the message file has been processed, the information is gone
> (except for the alias list file).

May I delete it without furthermore conflicts ?


Christophe Reverd
--
Xon-Xoff, des solutions Internet cles en main pour chaque budget
Pour en savoir plus http://www.Xon-Xoff.com et Info at Xon-Xoff dot com



Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 09:17:56 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re(2): Rebuilding a correct alias list ?

At 10:36 -0700 1/9/1997, Mikael Hansen wrote:

>>In fact some mails are sent to a mail server for a user on another domain
>>name ... !
>
>I seem to remember that something like this relating to test bounces was
>fixed a long time ago.

See the following URL for a complete description:

<http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/AutoShare-Talk/Archive-20-May-1
997.html#[27]>

At 09:46 +0200 2/9/1997, Christophe Reverd wrote:

>>Which version are you using?
>
>v1.4b8 on listserv at magnetik dot com for the IACCHOS list.

The above was fixed in 1.3, so it isn't that. If you feel there's still a
problem, I'll take you up on your offer of sending me all relevant mails
for the case in question.

>May I delete it without furthermore conflicts ?

Go ahead. The alias files merely hold links between envelope sender
addresses and RFC From addresses whenever they differ from each other. They
are not needed per se.



Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 14:33:20 -0400
From: "Gordon Shupe, Technology Specialist" <gshupe at stone.web.brevard.k12.fl dot us>
Subject: How to announce?

I searched the most recent archives of this list, and the Autoshare 
setup instructions, and I can't seem to find out how to set my list to 
be an announce only list. (Right now I am just dragging out my folder 
with the subscribers addresses in it and replacing it with one with ust 
my address:-)

Also,  I had the same failure to find Facespan extension that Mikael 
mentioned and am trying now to download the autoshare complete Admin 
tool. (Maybe this will allow me to set the Announce feature.)

server: Mac PPC 6290
System 7.5.3 update 2

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:47:53 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: How to announce?

At 14:33 -0400 3/9/1997, Gordon Shupe, Technology Specialist wrote:

>I searched the most recent archives of this list, and the Autoshare
>setup instructions, and I can't seem to find out how to set my list to
>be an announce only list. (Right now I am just dragging out my folder
>with the subscribers addresses in it and replacing it with one with ust
>my address:-)

In the AutoShare Admin, Command-L for the Lists window, double-click on the
list name; in the Lists window, click on the Announcement radio button and
click on the Update button to save.

Or run this tiny AppleScript (enter the name of your list!)

tell application "AutoShare"
  SetList Options {List: "Your List", List Type: "Announcement"}
end tell

>Also,  I had the same failure to find Facespan extension that Mikael
>mentioned and am trying now to download the autoshare complete Admin
>tool. (Maybe this will allow me to set the Announce feature.)

Good idea! Hope it works for you. (Which version are you using?)



Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 13:08:39 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: AutoShare 1.4b9

Hello all

AutoShare 1.4b9 is available from

	<ftp://ftp.dnai.com/users/m/meh/AutoShare/Beta/>

1.4b9 includes

-the two server applications, which improve the error checking of
  the standard folder paths
-the addendum, which is fully updated
-the script samples, which are fully updated

The current Admin may be found in the b7 archive.

--
Mikael Hansen <mailto:meh at dnai.com> <http://www.dnai dot com/~meh/autoshare/>



Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 13:29:44 -0700
From: Michael Ross <mross at antigone dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare 1.4b9

At 13:08 -0700 9/3/97, Mikael Hansen wrote:
>Hello all
>
>AutoShare 1.4b9 is available from
>
>	<ftp://ftp.dnai.com/users/m/meh/AutoShare/Beta/>
>
>1.4b9 includes
>
>-the two server applications, which improve the error checking of
>  the standard folder paths
>-the addendum, which is fully updated
>-the script samples, which are fully updated
>
>The current Admin may be found in the b7 archive.

Hi Mikael,

I'm finding it unecessarily complicated to keep track of where the
different pieces of the Autoshare beta release are. I understand that the
advantage is to save on bandwidth and not have everyone download a full
archive each beta version when there are items that don't change.

Maybe, in addition to the *.sit.hqx file for each beta, there should be a
folder ("AutoShare1,4b8","AutoShare1,4b9",...) with the individual
components, including links that point to the parts that have not changed.
This way, every beta would be complete and folks joining the beta cycle
late wouldn't have to "scavenge for parts"...

Just a thought.... Anyone else?

Best,
Michael


---
Michael Ross
mross at antigone dot com



Date: 3 Sep 1997 16:57:57 -0400
From: "Steve Rothman" <steve_rothman at rdm.scitex dot com>
Subject: Why AutoShare for announce-only lists?

I'm getting ready to set up an announcement-only list for customers of my
company (not a discussion list).

I don't need a mechanism for people to subscribe or unsubsubscribe themselves.
I already maintain my list of addresses using a database and wish to continue
using this approach.

Given my situation, what reasons are there to use AutoShare rather than just
EIMS by itself (with its "forward to list" feature)? Obviously, if I later
want to do a discussion list, or let people manage their own subscriptions,
that would be two big benefits to AutoShare. But are there reasons why I'd
want to use it right now? 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

-Steve Rothman <steve_rothman at rdm.scitex dot com>

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:18:29 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare 1.4b9

At 13:29 -0700 3/9/1997, Michael Ross wrote:

>I'm finding it unecessarily complicated to keep track of where the
>different pieces of the Autoshare beta release are.

The b7 and b9 archives are the only current archives, located in the same
ftp directory. These are also the only two archives mentioned in the b9
note.

>I understand that the advantage is to save on bandwidth and not have
>everyone download a full archive each beta version when there are items
>that don't change.

Yes, plus the limitation on ftp storage.

>Maybe, in addition to the *.sit.hqx file for each beta, there should be a
>folder ("AutoShare1,4b8","AutoShare1,4b9",...) with the individual
>components, including links that point to the parts that have not changed.
>This way, every beta would be complete and folks joining the beta cycle
>late wouldn't have to "scavenge for parts"...

Parts not new in b7 and b9 are available in the released 1.3. If I were to
also continously create archives containing old stuff only and update links
to these, the overhead in administration, file management, uploads and
notifications would eat up my time otherwise spent on programming,
documentation and list responses. Worse is that it may not appear simpler
or more accessable to you.



Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:30:17 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Why AutoShare for announce-only lists?

At 16:57 -0400 3/9/1997, Steve Rothman wrote:

>I'm getting ready to set up an announcement-only list for customers of my
>company (not a discussion list).
>
>I don't need a mechanism for people to subscribe or unsubsubscribe themselves.
>I already maintain my list of addresses using a database and wish to continue
>using this approach.
>
>Given my situation, what reasons are there to use AutoShare rather than just
>EIMS by itself (with its "forward to list" feature)?

Simple mailing lists, both announcement and private, can be accommodated by
EIMS or even by Eudora. You will miss out on archives primarily, but if you
don't need those either, a list server would appear to be an overkill.

Using AutoShare now however provides you the experience needed later when
actual list server requirements come around. Acquiring a comfortable
headstart isn't all that bad :-)



Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:52:54 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare 1.4b9

At 15:18 -0700 3/9/1997, Mikael Hansen wrote:

>The b7 and b9 archives are the only current archives, located in the same
>ftp directory.

>Parts not new in b7 and b9 are available in the released 1.3.

Beta archives not relating to b7 and b9 have been moved to a subdirectory
entitled Obsolete. That should make the beta directory overview clearer!



Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 17:44:25 -0700
From: Michael Ross <mross at antigone dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare 1.4b9

At 15:52 -0700 9/3/97, Mikael Hansen wrote:
>At 15:18 -0700 3/9/1997, Mikael Hansen wrote:
>
>>The b7 and b9 archives are the only current archives, located in the same
>>ftp directory.
>
>>Parts not new in b7 and b9 are available in the released 1.3.
>
>Beta archives not relating to b7 and b9 have been moved to a subdirectory
>entitled Obsolete. That should make the beta directory overview clearer!

Thanks! Sorry for the suggestion of administrative nightmares.. :)

---
Michael Ross
mross at antigone dot com



Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 20:32:08 -0500
From: Tom Weishaar <TomW at SiteCentral dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare-Talk digest 4 Sep 1997

> I'm getting ready to set up an announcement-only list for customers of my
> company (not a discussion list).
> 
> I don't need a mechanism for people to subscribe or unsubsubscribe themselves.
> I already maintain my list of addresses using a database and wish to continue
> using this approach.
> 
> Given my situation, what reasons are there to use AutoShare rather than just
> EIMS by itself (with its "forward to list" feature)? 

Unless you do something like change the list's account setup (in EIMS) back and 
forth when you want to send a message to the list, the danger you run is that 
_anyone_ can send an annoucement to your list, not just you. Autoshare removes 
_most_ of the danger, although it's still possible by spoofing the listmaster's 
address (I'd prefer a password in the first line of the message).

Another consideration is whether you want people to be able to see who's on your 
list. AutoShare can be set up to make this either much easier or harder than when 
running EIMS alone.

-- 
Tom Weishaar
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://SiteCentral.com/         Web Site Development Corporation

Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 20:00:43 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare-Talk digest 4 Sep 1997

At 20:32 -0500 3/9/1997, Tom Weishaar wrote:

>Autoshare removes _most_ of the danger, although it's still possible by
>spoofing the listmaster's address (I'd prefer a password in the first
>line of the message).

By applying mail-back confirmation, AutoShare removes *all* of the danger!



Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:55:51 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: Re: AutoShare-Talk digest 4 Sep 1997

At 02:32 4/9/97, Tom Weishaar wrote:

>Unless you do something like change the list's account setup (in EIMS)
>back and
>forth when you want to send a message to the list, the danger you run is that
>_anyone_ can send an annoucement to your list, not just you. Autoshare removes
>_most_ of the danger, although it's still possible by spoofing the
>listmaster's
>address (I'd prefer a password in the first line of the message).

Hi Tom :-)

Actually, we discussed this a while back. If you permanently disable the
list account in EIMS, you can use the passworded email admin feature to
post messages - just as you suggest. No need to change things back and
forth.

( :-])  James



Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 10:28:55 -0500
From: Tom Weishaar <TomW at SiteCentral dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare-Talk digest 5 Sep 1997

> 
> Actually, we discussed this a while back. If you permanently disable the
> list account in EIMS, you can use the passworded email admin feature to
> post messages - just as you suggest.
> 

Neat trick. Since the list's account is disabled, if somebody tries the 
spoofing trick the message will get bounced. So the only way to post to the 
list is via email admin. Remind me of one detail -- can you set up an email 
admin password on a list basis, or is the password system wide? Also, what's 
the email admin syntax for posting a message? I use email admin all the time 
to sub/unsub people, but I've never posted a message that way...

-- 
Tom Weishaar
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://SiteCentral.com/         Web Site Development Corporation

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 08:37:56 -0700
From: Camelot Administrator <camelot.admin at lmco dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare-Talk digest 5 Sep 1997

At 10:28 AM -0500 on 9/5/97, Tom Weishaar wrote:


> >
> > Actually, we discussed this a while back. If you permanently disable the
> > list account in EIMS, you can use the passworded email admin feature to
> > post messages - just as you suggest.
> >
>
> Neat trick. Since the list's account is disabled, if somebody tries the
> spoofing trick the message will get bounced. So the only way to post to the
> list is via email admin. Remind me of one detail -- can you set up an email
> admin password on a list basis, or is the password system wide? Also, what's
> the email admin syntax for posting a message? I use email admin all the time
> to sub/unsub people, but I've never posted a message that way...
>

The passwords are list specific.  Go into Admin, double-click the list, and
in the lower righthand corner of the list configuration window is the list
password.

Don't know the email admin syntax for posting a message.

Bill

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bill Catambay..................... <mailto:bill.m.catambay at lmco dot com>  |
| Lockheed Martin, EIS.............. <phone:408.742.1000>               |
|                                                                       |
| Software Developer, Webmaster, Map Maker                              |
| http://nexus.lmms.lmco.com/DEMON                                      |
| http://www.catambay.com/pascal-central                                |
| http://www.catambay.com/morgana                                       |
|                                                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+



Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 10:17:55 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: The remote post command

At 10:28 -0500 5/9/1997, Tom Weishaar wrote:

>Also, what's the email admin syntax for posting a message?

See the addendum's section on Remote administration by e-mail:

  <http://www.dnai.com/~meh/autoshare/addendum/#remoteadminemail>

and move down to the paragraph on the post command.

Within the standard formula

  <password> <command> <e-mail> <list> <rest>

the post command picks up the sender's e-mail address and user name from
the e-mail and rest tokens respectively; the list token is used to update
the recipient, so the contribution gets posted to the list.

So if the line

  rosebud post TomW at SiteCentral dot com fun-l Tom Weishaar

is placed in the first line of the body, your message will be updated to a
list contribution to the fun-l list from you!

While the available documentation offers all the tools needed, I realize
that examples are often helpful in getting the message across more quickly.
Feel free to send me example notes on individual commands, and I'll be
happy to include them in a subfolder (similar to the Web Forms subfolder)
in the Samples folder in the released 1.4 archive.



Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 15:35:08 -0400
From: wsuarez at digprod dot com (Bill Suarez)
Subject: Re: AutoShare 1.4b9

Mikael,

I can't seem to do "remote admin by email" under 1.4b9.

Did something get broken again??

I can use James's form, but if I simply create an email using this syntax:
<password> <command> <email address> <mailing list> <Name>

it gets bounced back with the "Invalid Listserver Command"

Bill Suarez
_______________________________________________________________________________
Subject: AutoShare 1.4b9
From:    AutoShare-Talk at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk at Internet
Date:    9/3/97  1:08 PM

Hello all

AutoShare 1.4b9 is available from

        <ftp://ftp.dnai.com/users/m/meh/AutoShare/Beta/>

1.4b9 includes

-the two server applications, which improve the error checking of
  the standard folder paths
-the addendum, which is fully updated
-the script samples, which are fully updated

The current Admin may be found in the b7 archive.

--
Mikael Hansen <mailto:meh at dnai.com> <http://www.dnai dot com/~meh/autoshare/>



**  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
**  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/AutoShare-Talk/>

Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 13:48:19 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: AutoShare 1.4b9

At 15:35 -0400 5/9/1997, Bill Suarez wrote:

>[...] if I simply create an email using this syntax:
><password> <command> <email address> <mailing list> <Name>
>
>it gets bounced back with the "Invalid Listserver Command"

I just checked and found no problems. Are you sure you are using the
correct password? Could you mail me a StuffIt'ed copy of the file in Filed
Mail folder? Thanks.



Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:23:38 -0700
From: Gary Szabo <gszabo at centralia.ctc dot edu>
Subject: Another "Lists Within Lists" question

[Greetings, all...this may be a question just for List God James Berriman,
but others may find it of interest]

James Berriman wrote, way back on May 24, 1997:
>At 21:32 23/05/97, Alan S. Dobkin wrote:
>>Is it possible to have a list within a list with AutoShare?  For instance,
>>List 1 contains members A, B, and C.  List 2 contains List 1 plus member D.
>>
>>Incidentally, I've tried this, and it seems to only send the message to
>>member D, but not to A, B, or C.  So, I'm wondering if I did something
>>wrong or if it's simply not possible.
>
>The problem with subscribing a list to another list is that any message
>from the first list contains a precedence: bulk header, which causes
>AutoShare to filter the message out before it gets to the second list.
>
>This is done to prevent mail loops, and to prevent AutoShare vacation
>notices going out to mailing lists.
>
>I've heard of one person hacking the precedence header strings to achieve
>this very thing, but I do not recommend it!
>
>Try this:
>
>list    account         points to
>====    =======         =========
>
>foo     foo             filed mail
>        foo.m           foo.m file (in LS folder)
>        foo.d           foo.d file (in LS folder)
>
>bar     bar             filed mail
>        bar.m           foobar.m account
>        bar.d           foobar.d account
>
>        foobar.m        mailing list containing foo.m and bar-m account names
>        foobar.d        mailing list containing foo.d and bar-d account names
>        bar-m           bar.m file (in LS folder)
>        bar-d           bar.d file (in LS folder)
>
>A message to list 'foo' goes only to that list, and a message to list 'bar'
>goes to both. I hope...

I've been testing this theorem, but my question is concerning 'foobar.m'
and 'foobar.d.'  I assume these mailing lists are hand generated?

What I'm looking for is a way of having an overarching list (open, with the
/sub token removed) for official campus news that can contain pointers to
other lists (such as faculty, staff, students).  So far, so good.

But the *real* problem comes if I'd like to use the Subject Prefixes.
Would such an approach contain the subject prefix [official] _AND_ the
prefix [faculty], for example?

TIA,

_________________________________________________________________________
|      Gary G. Szabo        |                                           |
| Director of Technology &  |                                           |
|    Computer Services      |  "I'd love to stay here and be normal...  |
|    Centralia College      |   but it's just so overrated..."          |
|  Centralia, Washington    |                                           |
| gszabo at centralia.ctc dot edu  |                                   Blur    |
|   (360)736-9391 x363      |                 from the CD "Parklife"    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[using Signature Randomizer 1.0]



Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 19:54:41 +0100
From: james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk (James Berriman)
Subject: Re: Another "Lists Within Lists" question

At 1:23 am 6/9/97, Gary Szabo wrote:

>James Berriman wrote, way back on May 24, 1997:

>>A message to list 'foo' goes only to that list, and a message to list 'bar'
>>goes to both. I hope...
>
>I've been testing this theorem, but my question is concerning 'foobar.m'
>and 'foobar.d.'  I assume these mailing lists are hand generated?

Yes, correct.

>What I'm looking for is a way of having an overarching list (open, with the
>/sub token removed) for official campus news that can contain pointers to
>other lists (such as faculty, staff, students).  So far, so good.
>
>But the *real* problem comes if I'd like to use the Subject Prefixes.
>Would such an approach contain the subject prefix [official] _AND_ the
>prefix [faculty], for example?

The short answer is NO. The suggested approach just points the output of
one AutoShare list to the subscriber lists of two AutoShare lists. It's a
hack ;-). So you'd just get the [official] prefix.

You could extend this idea by pointing the output of your [official] list
to an EIMS mailing list that contains all your other autoshare .m and .d
accounts, but then people on multiple lists would get multiple copies of
the messages. Not good!

(Actually, I'm not sure if this is true. Is EIMS smart enough not to send
the same outgoing message to the same address twice? I have a feeling it
might be).

Looks like another feature request, Mikael :-)

It would be very useful in general if a listmaster could send a message to
all or a number of related lists without sending duplicate messages for
those who are subscribed to several lists.

So, for example, a message to autoshare-announce would also go out to
subscribers on autoshare-talk and autoshare-tip-of-the-day. Subscribers who
are on all three would only get one message.

AutoShare would build its autoshare-announce.m and .d files by reading all
three subscriber lists.

Another idea - add an 'all' option to the 'post' command in email admin.

    <password> post listmaster at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk all James Berriman

This could be linked to a master autoshare list called <lists@domain>.

( :-])  James



Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 12:08:32 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Another "Lists Within Lists" question

At 17:23 -0700 5/9/1997, Gary Szabo wrote:

>What I'm looking for is a way of having an overarching list (open, with the
>/sub token removed) for official campus news that can contain pointers to
>other lists (such as faculty, staff, students).

While mailing lists may directed at groups of people such as faculty,
staff, students, list server lists are generally directed at subscribers
interested in a given topic. Perhaps the topics are simply what pertains to
the respective groups in question?

If I read you correctly, list server requests are handled locally only
(each list individually), while list contribution may be posted both
locally and globally (overarching).

The global list points to groups only (actual subscriber lists), whereas
regular lists holds subscribers. So if Global-L points to both Faculty-L
and Staff-L and you post to Global-L, subscribers on both Faculty-L and
Staff-L receive the list contribution.

At 19:54 +0100 6/9/1997, James Berriman wrote:

>It would be very useful in general if a listmaster could send a message to
>all or a number of related lists without sending duplicate messages for
>those who are subscribed to several lists.

It would seem to pertain to any given subscriber who posts.

>AutoShare would build its autoshare-announce.m and .d files by reading all
>three subscriber lists.

The technique would be a simple merge, which works well with ordered lists
in eliminating duplicates.

>But the *real* problem comes if I'd like to use the Subject Prefixes.
>Would such an approach contain the subject prefix [official] _AND_ the
>prefix [faculty], for example?

At 19:54 +0100 6/9/1997, James Berriman wrote:

>The short answer is NO. The suggested approach just points the output of
>one AutoShare list to the subscriber lists of two AutoShare lists. It's a
>hack ;-). So you'd just get the [official] prefix.

If a single set of .m and .d files is to be based on the above merge, you
would get the global prefix only. If on the other hand a global post is to
be converted into a number of local posts and then processed, you would get
the local prefix only.

Or picture some auto-expand feature: when the AutoShare server comes across
one of its list names while building the .m and .d files, the list address
is expanded into the respective subscriber addresses on-the-fly. Some loop
detection is obviously imperative here. So if the Global-L file is

Faculty-L@domain
Staff-L@domain

and the Faculty-L is

a@domain1
b@domain2

and the Staff-L is

c@domain
d@domain4

the expanded version becomes

a@domain1
b@domain2
c@domain
d@domain4

As the auto-expansion may be recursive, what happens if c is a list? Then
the expanded list may look like

a@domain1
b@domain2
e@domain5
f@domain6
d@domain4

What if c doesn't hold

e@domain5
f@domain6

but rather

e@domain5
Global-L@domain

then the last address is discarded, and the expanded list becomes

a@domain1
b@domain2
e@domain5
d@domain4

The same thing happens if c holds

e@domain5
c@domain

as any given list can be expanded only once per the loop detection.

Fun or risky business? Or both? ;-)



Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 04:54:58 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: AutoShare 1.4fc1

Good morning all

AutoShare 1.4fc1 is available from

	<ftp://ftp.dnai.com/users/m/meh/AutoShare/Beta/>

1.4fc1 includes everything new to the 1.4 betas.

Significant speed enhancements have been added to when building both
automated web archives and digests. Statistics are scheduled to appear in
today's AutoShare Tip Of The Day.

In remote administration by e-mail, the general password now works even
when a list-specific password is present.

The admin clock counter has been fixed.

Various minor stuff has been taken care of.

Unless a showstopper turns up, 1.4 is to be released in a matter of days.

--
Mikael Hansen <mailto:meh at dnai.com> <http://www.dnai dot com/~meh/autoshare/>



Subject: Autoshare ignores subscribed users
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 97 09:37:21 +0100
From: Jed <jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk>

Hi.,

A problem I have noticed is when someone subscribes to a list both their 
e-mail and canonical (personal) name are stored in the 
System:Auto:LS:list file which are then used to check against future 
incoming list requests. The problem is that if, for whatever bizarre 
reason, a user decided to change their canonical name ( from within their 
mail application ) the list server no longer recognises them as a 
subscribed user and sends them the usual error messages. Is it not 
possible to configure autoshare to only check the e-mail address and 
ignore the personal name entry when comparing incoming list requests?

Jed Everitt. C/C++, Java Programmer
Senior Technical Officer, Psychology Department.
University of Hertfordshire.

phone: +44 (0) 1707.284635
Fax: +44 (0) 1707.285073
mailto://jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk
http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/
news://news.psy.herts.ac.uk/autoshare
news://news.psy.herts.ac.uk/tango

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 12:52:37 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: Re: Autoshare ignores subscribed users

At 09:37 9/9/97, Jed wrote:
>Hi.,
>
>A problem I have noticed is when someone subscribes to a list both their
>e-mail and canonical (personal) name are stored in the
>System:Auto:LS:list file which are then used to check against future
>incoming list requests. The problem is that if, for whatever bizarre
>reason, a user decided to change their canonical name ( from within their
>mail application ) the list server no longer recognises them as a
>subscribed user and sends them the usual error messages. Is it not
>possible to configure autoshare to only check the e-mail address and
>ignore the personal name entry when comparing incoming list requests?

Jed, it's not their personal name that's changed. It's their smtp envelope
address. This sometimes happens, particularly if someone switches mail
clients.

You can set AutoShare to use their rfc From: header field rather than the
envelope, or try turning on AutoShare's subscriber alias feature, which
generates a list of envelope<-->From: address mappings for new subscribers.

The 'rfc from' and 'subscriber aliases' checkboxes are under More
Miscellaneous... in the Admin.

( :-])  James



Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 10:13:28 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: AutoShare 1.4 released!

Hello all

AutoShare 1.4 has been released and is available from

	<ftp://ftp.dnai.com/users/m/meh/AutoShare/>

The complete Admin and a FAT server version are available from

	<ftp://ftp.dnai.com/users/m/meh/AutoShare/AutoShare-More/>

As the beta phase is over (thanks everyone!), all beta archives have been
deleted on the ftp site.

The online web pages are fully up-to-date at

	<http://www.dnai.com/~meh/autoshare/>

--
Mikael Hansen <mailto:meh at dnai dot com>



Date: Tue, 09 Sep 1997 14:46:55 -0400
From: "Gordon Shupe, Technology Specialist" <gshupe at stone.web.brevard.k12.fl dot us>
Subject: Re: Making an Announce List

From a previous request:
>>I searched the most recent archives of this list, and the Autoshare
>>setup instructions, and I can't seem to find out how to set my list to
>>be an announce only list. 

From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
>Or run this tiny AppleScript (enter the name of your list!)

>tell application "AutoShare"
>  SetList Options {List: "Your List", List Type: "Announcement"}
>end tell

Worked Great!

>>Also,  I had the same failure to find Facespan extension that Mikael
>>mentioned and am trying now to download the autoshare complete Admin tool.

From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
>Hope it works for you. (Which version are you using?)

Still did the same thing! Even after downloading the latest one off of your ftp 
site with the Facespan extension included:
"Please locate the Facespan Extension" I click on it, then: 
"Unable to continue because Facespan extension is missing, failed to open, or is 
too old."

Facespan 2.1
server: Mac PPC 6290
System 7.5.3 update 2

Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 12:12:19 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Making an Announce List

At 14:46 -0400 9/9/1997, Gordon Shupe, Technology Specialist wrote:

>>Or run this tiny AppleScript (enter the name of your list!)
>
>>tell application "AutoShare"
>>  SetList Options {List: "Your List", List Type: "Announcement"}
>>end tell
>
>Worked Great!

Good!

>Still did the same thing! Even after downloading the latest one off of your
>ftp site with the Facespan extension included:
>"Please locate the Facespan Extension" I click on it, then:
>"Unable to continue because Facespan extension is missing, failed to open,
>or is too old."
>
>Facespan 2.1
>server: Mac PPC 6290
>System 7.5.3 update 2

I have sent a mail to support @ FaceSpan and will keep you posted.



Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 12:25:27 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Making an Announce List

FaceSpan support has now gotten back to me.

Since FaceSpan 2.1 is totally PPC native, the FaceSpan people are taking
advantage of QuickTime components.

The FaceSpan Extension is expecting to find the following extensions in the
system before it can be resolved:

QuickTime
QuickTime PowerPlug

Both of these extensions are part of a standard MacOS install. More than
likely they have been turned off via the Extensions Manager.

Gordon, let us know if this does it for you.



Subject: Remote Admin problem
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 97 09:39:43 +0100
From: Jed <jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk>

Hi,

Thanks to James for the tip concerning  'rfc from' and 'subscriber 
aliases' to solve my problem but I haven't been able to remotely attach 
to the Autoshare Application as yet. I have installed FaceSpan on a Mac 
from which I need to administer Autoshare which is running on another. 
The trouble is even though the remote Mac volume (running Autoshare) is 
visible on the desktop, Autoshare admin will ask to be logged back onto 
this same volume (via a chooser looking dialog box) but refuses all valid 
name and password entries. Is this dialog box requesting info from the 
user-groups file on the remote Mac or is it requesting info from 
Autoshare? Do I need to setup, or is their a default name password from 
within Autoshare admin?

Jed, Confused from Hatfield!

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 10:44:17 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: Re: Remote Admin problem

At 09:39 10/9/97, Jed wrote:
>The trouble is even though the remote Mac volume (running Autoshare) is
>visible on the desktop, Autoshare admin will ask to be logged back onto
>this same volume (via a chooser looking dialog box) but refuses all valid
>name and password entries. Is this dialog box requesting info from the
>user-groups file on the remote Mac or is it requesting info from
>Autoshare? Do I need to setup, or is their a default name password from
>within Autoshare admin?

Yes, you do need to log in to the remote application via the program
linking dialog.

You need to turn on program linking in the Sharing Setup control panel.

Make sure that AutoShare allows linking by clicking on the AutoShare
application in the finder and selecting sharing... in the file menu. The
"allow remote program linking" box should be checked.

( :-])  James



Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 03:33:01 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Remote Admin problem

At 10:44 +0100 10/9/1997, James Berriman wrote:

>Yes, you do need to log in to the remote application via the program
>linking dialog.
>
>You need to turn on program linking in the Sharing Setup control panel.
>
>Make sure that AutoShare allows linking by clicking on the AutoShare
>application in the finder and selecting sharing... in the file menu. The
>"allow remote program linking" box should be checked.

See <http://www.dnai.com/~meh/autoshare/addendum/#scripting> :-)



Subject: Autoshare/Admin communication
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 97 12:15:08 +0100
From: Jed <jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk>

Sorry about not spotting the 'turn on program linking' I'll get my 
manager to send me on a course!.
I'm now able to communicate with the remote Autoshare app. but the dialog 
boxes that appear have no parameters set. Should these reflect the 
current state of Autoshare? After clicking the update button for any 
newly assigned parameters I assume these will be reflected when Autoshare 
is again interrogated, which isn't happening. I'm sure there is a simple 
solution considering the response to my two previous messages. Also is it 
common for the Admin app. to request the location of Autoshare a number 
of times when a request for information is made?

Jed.
jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 12:25:35 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: Re: Autoshare/Admin communication

At 12:15 10/9/97, Jed wrote:

>I'm now able to communicate with the remote Autoshare app. but the dialog
>boxes that appear have no parameters set. Should these reflect the
>current state of Autoshare? After clicking the update button for any
>newly assigned parameters I assume these will be reflected when Autoshare
>is again interrogated, which isn't happening. I'm sure there is a simple
>solution considering the response to my two previous messages.

Sounds like a network problem. No response from the remote AutoShare, or
the apple events are timing out.

>Also is it
>common for the Admin app. to request the location of Autoshare a number
>of times when a request for information is made?

If you have a copy of AutoShare handy in the same folder as the Admin, it
won't keep asking. It's looking for the AutoShare Dictionary (AETE
resource). There's also a ResEdit file that ships in the same folder as the
Admin which performs the same function (it contains nothing but the AETE).

( :-])  James



Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 07:41:55 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: EIMS 2.0 beta released!

Good morning all

EIMS 2.0b1 has been released, and you can get it from

  <http://www.eudora.com/betas/eims2.html>



Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:27:17 -0500
From: Paul DuBois <paul at snake dot net>
Subject: Re: EIMS 2.0 beta released!

>Good morning all
>
>EIMS 2.0b1 has been released, and you can get it from
>
>  <http://www.eudora.com/betas/eims2.html>

Anyone tried it with AutoShare yet?

--
Paul DuBois
paul at snake dot net
Home Page: http://www.primate.wisc.edu/people/dubois
Software:  http://www.primate.wisc.edu/software



Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 08:32:53 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: EIMS 2.0 beta released!

At 10:27 -0500 11/9/1997, Paul DuBois wrote:

>>EIMS 2.0b1 has been released, and you can get it from
>>
>>  <http://www.eudora.com/betas/eims2.html>
>
>Anyone tried it with AutoShare yet?

The AutoShare lists have been using the 2.0 alpha for a while.



Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 16:43:44 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: Re: EIMS 2.0 beta released!

At 16:27 11/9/97, Paul DuBois wrote:

>Received: from snake.net (144.92.43.105) by frutiger.staffs.ac.uk with ESMTP
> (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.0b1); Thu, 11 Sep 1997 16:24:15 +0100
[snip]
>Anyone tried it with AutoShare yet?

That answer your question, Paul?  :-)

Actually, this list has been quietly running on EIMS 2 alphas for quite a
while. Rock solid on my machines (LCII and 840AV) and a very easy upgrade
from 1.2.

( :-]) James



Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 09:51:41 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: MacInTouch Recent News

Both AutoShare 1.4 and the EIMS 2.0 beta are mentioned at

  <http://www.macintouch.com/newsrecent.shtml>



Subject: EIMS 2.0 not importing old settings?
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 97 17:57:13 +0100
From: J.Everitt <jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk>

Hi,

Anyone know how to tell EIMS 2.0 beta to import information for my 
previous version 1.2b1. The new server looks excellent except I cannot 
find any way of porting over old users and settings.

Jed, confused from Hatfield.
jed at psy.herts.ac dot uk

Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 10:07:33 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: EIMS 2.0 not importing old settings?

At 17:57 +0100 11/9/1997, J.Everitt wrote:

>Anyone know how to tell EIMS 2.0 beta to import information for my
>previous version 1.2b1. The new server looks excellent except I cannot
>find any way of porting over old users and settings.

Find the "Upgrade EIMS 1.x to 2.0" application in the installer.