Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 20:24:25 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?

At 10:03 -0700 9/19/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:

>I'm seriously considering moving to an integrated web and mail server such
>as WebSTAR 4 or Appleshare IP 6.2. It would simplify some things enormously
>for me... Any chance of getting autoshare to work in either environment?

Probably not without the help of the respective developer teams. I 
incidently sent a reminder to the ASIP team the day before you posted 
your question.


From: "Jesse Williams Proudman" <jwilliams-proudman at ninewire dot com>
Subject: RE: Auto Responders
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 20:31:38 -0700

Is there a resource anywhere on how I might go about writing a process
extender?

        Jesse Williams Proudman - NineWire Productions
 http://www.ninewire.com <-> JWilliams-Proudman at ninewire dot com
        Innovative and Creative Web Design and Hosting

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikael Hansen [mailto:meh at dnai dot com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 8:20 PM
> To: Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk
> Subject: Re: Auto Responders
>
>
> At 23:37 -0700 9/21/99, Jesse Williams Proudman wrote:
>
> >Can autoshare to REAL auto responses?
> >
> >IE:
> >User account in SIMS is ->
> >
> >client1.clientname
> >
> >Can Autoshare autoreply using ->
> >
> >clientname at client1 dot com
> >
> >???
>
> I'm not sure I understand. There is no built-in feature to configure
> the sender address to whatever you like. If you write a process
> extender, you can do it.
>
>
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>
>


Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:11:42 -0500
From: Michael Croft <michael at whiterose dot org>
Subject: Re: SIMS 1.8b6, AS4.0: can't figure out how to have two moderators

>Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 20:16:10 -0700
>From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
>Subject: Re: SIMS 1.8b6, AS4.0: can't figure out how to have two moderators
>
>At 01:24 -0500 9/22/99, Michael Croft wrote:
>
>  >Is it possible to do team list moderation?  I've already set it up
>  >so that my fiancee and I can both send to the moderated list we're
>  >creating, but what we really want is for both of us to get the mail
>  >to the moderator so that either of us could approve it.
>
>Yes, that is possible. In the documentation, see
>
>Running the server
>    Running a list server
>      List server and list basics
>        Moderators

OK, in fact I've read that.  I thought that that was supposed to work 
for me, too.
I have List Stuff set to 'ck' (both lower case).
List Type is set to 'Moderated'
E-mail: has been set to a SIMS list which forwards to both of us. 
I've also tried two addresses with various separators (','  ';'). 
Currently set to casacombo at whiterose dot org
default listmaster is set to casacombo.  We both get logs when we 
force them out.

Casacombo is a SIMS account which mirrors to two other SIMS accounts 
(of which I'm not even the first recipient...)
ginger at whiterose dot org
michael at whiterose dot org

both ginger at whiterose dot org and michael at whiterose dot org are subscribed. 
We can both post.  No one else can.  postmaster is assigned as a user 
(in fact, all users other than Ginger and michael act the same way).

andyet...
SIMS Log:
00:04:25 2 SMTP-595(209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom.net) {S.0000043448} 
received, 863 bytes
00:04:25 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043448] 
<v04220608b410b6c6f156 at 209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom dot net> 0+1 
=46rom:postmaster at whiterose dot org
00:04:25 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043448] delivered to (celtic-houston)
00:04:26 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043448] deleted
00:04:41 2 SYSTEM {F.43448-1.1} Text File Submitted as 
{S.0000043454}, 1698 bytes
00:04:43 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043454] 
<129113428809482155850 at whiterose dot org> 0+1 From:Listbot at whiterose dot org
00:04:43 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043454] delivered to (michael)
00:04:45 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043454] deleted

Tech Log:
----- AutoShare Log Report, Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:05:58 -----

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:04:29 Transaction
× Source Folder: Mos Eisley:Auto:Filed Mail: (Files: 1)
× Destination Folder: Mos Eisley:System 
=46older:Preferences:AutoShare:AutoShare Temp: (Files: 0)
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:04:31 File to process: F.43448-1
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:04:31 Incoming file is F.43448-1
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:04:32 Outgoing file is F.43448-1.1
× The resource file (F.43448-1) was opened successfully (6676)
× The resource file (F.43448-1.1) was opened successfully (7428)
× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  1 STR#)
× Sender:
× From: [postmaster at whiterose dot org]
× Recipients (1):
× To: [celtic-houston at whiterose dot org]
× Source resource is available
× Source resource is available
× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  2 STR#)
× Sender:
× From: [postmaster at whiterose dot org]
× Recipients (1):
× To: [celtic-houston.m at whiterose dot org]
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:04:35 celtic-houston.m at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org test message
× Mos Eisley:Auto:Filed Mail:F.43448-1 was deleted
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:04:38 Copying F.43448-1.1

What other info can I give you to help you diagnose and/or debug this 
problem?  I  can go through config files with resedit (or simpletext) 
if you need me to...

>--------------
Michael Croft                   "Babeheart?  What's it about?"
mailto:michael at whiterose dot org        "It's about a cute little pig that
http://www.whiterose.org    slaughters the English" -- Freakazoid
>--------------

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 10:09:30 +0200
From: HOnza Koudelka <koudelka at appleklub dot cz>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Remote review

>At 23:00 +0200 9/21/99, HOnza Koudelka wrote:
>
>>I use AutoShare 4.0 and set all lists to use the internal database
>>format. Today I tried to request a review, and received the
>>following response. What should I think about it?
>
>I don't get the garbage that you got, just nothing in that part of
>the body.

Aha, so it can be problem of my client?

I get the garbage only sometimes, if I retry the review command, the 
response is OK.

>The remote review is supported for the standard subscriber
>format only, for reasons that escape me at this time, but probably
>due to optional fields. You can use the Review process extender
>sample of type Remote.

What does it mean? I use your internal database format, without 
optional fields. I switched to it just because I thought it can be 
little faster.

HOnza
--

If you are crazy enough, look at http://www.appleklub.cz/~koudelka/

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 08:06:02 -0700
From: "Michael C. Gilbert" <mcg at halcyon dot com>
Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?

At 20:24 -0700 1999.09.23, Mikael Hansen wrote:

 * At 10:03 -0700 9/19/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:
 *
 * >I'm seriously considering moving to an integrated web and mail server su=
ch
 * >as WebSTAR 4 or Appleshare IP 6.2. It would simplify some things enormou=
sly
 * >for me... Any chance of getting autoshare to work in either environment?
 *
 * Probably not without the help of the respective developer teams. I
 * incidently sent a reminder to the ASIP team the day before you posted
 * your question.

Thank you.

Perhaps a followup question is in order then: How do I get multiple
programs (EIMS, Autoshare, a web server, a CGI environment) to operate well
together on the same server? Any advice?

-- Michael



Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 17:55:39 +0100
From: James Berriman <listmaster at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: re: Kudos to AutoShare

************************************************************
Message body too big (200 > 150), forwarded to the moderator
************************************************************

Apologies if this goes twice:  I've seen 3 messages since I sent it 
the first time, so I think I may not have gotten it to actually 
send...

>Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 07:02:43 -0700
>From: Mark Hartman <mh-list at harthaven dot com>
>Subject: Kudos to AutoShare

Kudos indeed, it's a great product and very fast.  If it weren't for 
free/cheap web software, I wouldn't have a server.

However, I am having some setup issues.  The second one pertains to 
the mailback confirmation.
>
>However, Mikael made it simple enough to set up confirmation requests for
>any action that ALL my lists are set up that way - and, since the spammer
>is always using a bogus address, they never get the confirmation requests
>and therefore never get subscribed... and the spam never gets out.
>

Mark (or anyone):

I've been having trouble with the confirmation mailback feature using 
AS 4.0 and SIMS 1.8b6.

The sequence of events is
1: user requests subscription or unsubscription from my list
2: user recieves confirmation message (customized, domain wide)
3: user replies
4: user recieves 2nd confirmation message (same as above, including same F. =
#)
5: user replies
6: user is added to the list.

Has anyone else run across this?  Or better yet, has anyone else solved this=
?

Thanks in advance,
Micahel Croft

Logs follow:
SIMS:
00:16:25 2 SMTP-600(209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom.net) {S.0000043471} 
received, 616 bytes
00:16:25 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043471] 
<v0422060ab410b98696d0 at 209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom dot net> 0+1 
=46rom:postmaster at whiterose dot org
00:16:26 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043471] delivered to (autoshare)
00:16:26 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043471] deleted
00:16:38 2 SYSTEM {F.43471-1} Text File Submitted as {S.0000043472}, 2477 by=
tes
00:16:39 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043472] 
<766394223325693446113 at whiterose dot org> 0+1 From:Listbot at whiterose dot org
00:16:39 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043472] delivered to (postmaster)
00:16:40 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043472] deleted
00:19:45 2 SMTP-601(209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom.net) {S.0000043473} 
received, 747 bytes
00:19:45 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043473] 
<v0422060cb410ba51c6a1 at 209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom dot net> 0+1 
=46rom:postmaster at whiterose dot org
00:19:45 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043473] delivered to (autoshare)
00:19:46 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043473] deleted
00:20:08 2 SYSTEM {F.43471-1} Text File Submitted as {S.0000043474}, 2477 by=
tes
00:20:09 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043474] 
<277623777722378729790 at whiterose dot org> 0+1 From:Listbot at whiterose dot org
00:20:09 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043474] delivered to (postmaster)
00:20:12 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043474] deleted
00:22:47 2 SMTP-604(209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom.net) {S.0000043482} 
received, 747 bytes
00:22:47 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043482] 
<v0422060db410bb1df684 at 209-245-210-7.hst0.flashcom dot net> 0+1 
=46rom:postmaster at whiterose dot org
00:22:47 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043482] delivered to (autoshare)
00:22:48 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043482] deleted
00:23:11 2 SYSTEM {F.43471-1.1} Text File Submitted as 
{S.0000043483}, 1694 bytes
00:23:12 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043483] 
<732317151115772954183 at whiterose dot org> 0+1 From:Listbot at whiterose dot org
00:23:51 2 SYSTEM(POP) [S.0000043483] delivered to (postmaster)
00:23:51 2 SYSTEM [S.0000043483] deleted

AutoshareLog:
----- AutoShare Log Report, Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:25:01 -----

=46ri, 24 Sep 1999 00:05:59 New log starting up

=46ri, 24 Sep 1999 00:06:01 Copying Log.Celtic-Houston
=46ri, 24 Sep 1999 00:06:03 Copying Log.Generic

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:16:31 autoshare at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org Creating mail-back confirmation

=46ri, 24 Sep 1999 00:16:34 Copying F.43471-1

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:19:46 autoshare at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org Released mail-back confirmation

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:20:00 autoshare at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org Creating mail-back confirmation

=46ri, 24 Sep 1999 00:20:01 Copying F.43471-1

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:49 autoshare at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org Released mail-back confirmation

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:52 Transaction
× Source Folder: Mos Eisley:Auto:Filed Mail: (Files: 1)
× Destination Folder: Mos Eisley:System 
=46older:Preferences:AutoShare:AutoShare Temp: (Files: 0)
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:54 File to process: F.43471-1
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:54 Incoming file is F.43471-1
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:54 Outgoing file is F.43471-1.1
× The resource file (F.43471-1) was opened successfully (6770)
× The resource file (F.43471-1.1) was opened successfully (7992)
× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  2 STR#)
× Sender:
× From: [postmaster at whiterose dot org]
× Recipients (1):
× To: [autoshare at whiterose dot org]
× Source resource is available
× Source resource is available
× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  1 STR#)
× Sender:
× From: [autoshare at whiterose dot org]
× Recipients (1):
× To: [postmaster at whiterose dot org]
× Text: Mos Eisley:Auto:Documents:autoshare:sub.celtic-houston
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:58 Process time was 2.01 seconds
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:59 autoshare at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org celtic-houston sub
× Mos Eisley:Auto:Filed Mail:F.43471-1 was deleted
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:23:02 Copying F.43471-1.1


Transactions
List server requests:                      1
Mail-back entries created:                 2
Mail-back entries released:                2
Transaction total:                         5

Individual test bounces

List server requests
sub:                                       1

Remote administration requests

=46rom: Listbot at whiterose dot org (Automatic List Processor)
Subject: AutoShare Report for Celtic-Houston
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:25:00 -0500

----- AutoShare Log Report, Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:25:00 -----

× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:52 Transaction
× Source Folder: Mos Eisley:Auto:Filed Mail: (Files: 1)
× Destination Folder: Mos Eisley:System 
=46older:Preferences:AutoShare:AutoShare Temp: (Files: 0)
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:54 File to process: F.43471-1
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:54 Incoming file is F.43471-1
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:54 Outgoing file is F.43471-1.1
× The resource file (F.43471-1) was opened successfully (6770)
× The resource file (F.43471-1.1) was opened successfully (7992)
× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  2 STR#)
× Sender:
× From: [postmaster at whiterose dot org]
× Recipients (1):
× To: [autoshare at whiterose dot org]
× Source resource is available
× Source resource is available
× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  1 STR#)
× Sender:
× From: [autoshare at whiterose dot org]
× Recipients (1):
× To: [postmaster at whiterose dot org]
× Text: Mos Eisley:Auto:Documents:autoshare:sub.celtic-houston
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:58 Process time was 2.01 seconds
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:22:59 autoshare at whiterose dot org 
postmaster at whiterose dot org celtic-houston sub
× Mos Eisley:Auto:Filed Mail:F.43471-1 was deleted
× Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:23:02 Copying F.43471-1.1


Transactions
List server requests:                      1
Transaction total:                         1

Individual test bounces

List server requests
sub:                                       1

Remote administration requests

>--------------
Michael Croft                   "Babeheart?  What's it about?"
mailto:michael at whiterose dot org        "It's about a cute little pig that
http://www.whiterose.org    slaughters the English" -- Freakazoid
>--------------


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


Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 00:00:45 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at acoustic.demon.co dot uk>
Subject: re: Kudos to AutoShare

Reading Michael's AutoShare log, I find this rather odd:

>× The resource file (F.43471-1) was opened successfully (6770)
>× The resource file (F.43471-1.1) was opened successfully (7992)
>× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  2 STR#)

Mikael, does this mean that the SIMS message file contains two 
recipient addresses? Perhaps this is the cause of the duplicated 
confirmation messages.

( :-])  James


Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 16:08:01 +0200
From: Giedo De Snijder <igiedsn at giedsn.eunet dot be>
Subject: Append prefix to original subject

Hi,

Is there away to append a prefix to an original subject line for 
autoreply accounts ?
=46or example: [Autoreply] your original subject

So far as I can see there are only 2 choices :
/=subject
/=subject <field>

TIA,

Giedo De Snijder

<mailto: gds at abitmore dot be>


++++

aBITmore
resultaatgericht ondernemen via internet
tel (03)360 90 69
http://abitmore.be/

++++


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 03:04:27 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Append prefix to original subject

At 16:08 +0200 9/25/99, Giedo De Snijder wrote:

>Is there away to append a prefix to an original subject line for 
>autoreply accounts ?
>For example: [Autoreply] your original subject

No, but I have added it to my to-do list.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 03:02:36 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: RE: Auto Responders

At 20:31 -0700 9/23/99, Jesse Williams Proudman wrote:

>Is there a resource anywhere on how I might go about writing a process
>extender?

There's a chapter in the documentation; there is also a folder with 
samples. Writing a process extender requires being comfortable with 
AppleScript.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 03:03:58 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?

At 08:06 -0700 9/24/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:

>Perhaps a followup question is in order then: How do I get multiple
>programs (EIMS, Autoshare, a web server, a CGI environment) to operate well
>together on the same server? Any advice?

Uh, that's too general a question for me :-)


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 03:02:01 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: SIMS 1.8b6, AS4.0: can't figure out how to have two moderators

At 00:11 -0500 9/24/99, Michael Croft wrote:

>I have List Stuff set to 'ck' (both lower case).
>List Type is set to 'Moderated'

That's fine. How does your problem show?

>E-mail: has been set to a SIMS list which forwards to both of us. 
>I've also tried two addresses with various separators (','  ';').

I am lost here, I'm afraid. AutoShare automatically forwards the list 
contribution to the moderators.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 03:03:25 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Remote review

At 10:09 +0200 9/24/99, HOnza Koudelka wrote:

>>The remote review is supported for the standard subscriber
>>format only, for reasons that escape me at this time, but probably
>>due to optional fields. You can use the Review process extender
>>sample of type Remote.
>
>What does it mean? I use your internal database format, without 
>optional fields. I switched to it just because I thought it can be 
>little faster.

The built-in database format is fast, but not faster than the standard.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 03:01:05 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: re: Kudos to AutoShare

At 00:00 +0100 9/25/99, James Berriman wrote:

>Reading Michael's AutoShare log, I find this rather odd:
>
>>× The resource file (F.43471-1) was opened successfully (6770)
>>× The resource file (F.43471-1.1) was opened successfully (7992)
>>× Number of resource types: 2 (1 STR  2 STR#)
>
>Mikael, does this mean that the SIMS message file contains two 
>recipient addresses? Perhaps this is the cause of the duplicated 
>confirmation messages.

No, it just means that there are two STR#'s; the second STR# is 8197, 
which stores the mailback keyword for internal processing.

Michael, I would suggest that you peek at the message files, prior to 
and following the AutoShare processing. For details how to do this, 
see

Moving on
   Trouble shooting


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 15:09:26 +0200
From: Giedo De Snijder <igiedsn at giedsn.eunet dot be>
Subject: Work lists : secret

Hi,

Yesterday I have tried the feature "secret".
In the List window one can put "secret"  in Work lists.
In EIMS you have to name your accounts for the list : secret.m and secret.d
But for the file path you have to point to the real name of the .m and .d fi=
le
That works.
But this means one can only configure 1 secret list per domain 
because you can't have 2 accounts with the same name.
Do I think right or is there a way to by-pass this ?
TIA,

Giedo De Snijder

<mailto: gds at abitmore dot be>


++++

aBITmore
resultaatgericht ondernemen via internet
tel (03)360 90 69
http://abitmore.be/

++++


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 09:06:42 -0700
From: "Michael C. Gilbert" <mcg at halcyon dot com>
Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?

At 03:03 -0700 1999.09.26, Mikael Hansen wrote:

 * At 08:06 -0700 9/24/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:
 *
 * >Perhaps a followup question is in order then: How do I get multiple
 * >programs (EIMS, Autoshare, a web server, a CGI environment) to operate w=
ell
 * >together on the same server? Any advice?
 *
 * Uh, that's too general a question for me :-)

You know, you're right!

What I meant was this: The more Internet applications I run on the same
server, the more they bog down and get stuck from time to time, as each
grabs CPU time and doesn't let it go. Consequently, I've always run my mail
server on a machine other than my web server. This requires that I enable
file sharing if I want web archives of my lists. It requires additional
hardware maintenance. Etc.

-- Michael



From: "Jesse Williams Proudman" <jwilliams-proudman at ninewire dot com>
Subject: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 11:06:32 -0700

Hmmm
This last message got bounced because it started with Get.  Oh well.  Here
it is again with the get fixed.

        Jesse Williams Proudman - NineWire Productions
 http://www.ninewire.com <-> JWilliams-Proudman at ninewire dot com
        Innovative and Creative Web Design and Hosting

-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Williams Proudman [mailto:jwilliams-proudman at ninewire dot com]
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 10:55 AM
To: Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk
Subject: RE: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?


Go get a small freeware application like Quid Quo Pro and run it on your
mail server.  It shouldn't bog things down too much.

        Jesse Williams Proudman - NineWire Productions
 http://www.ninewire.com <-> JWilliams-Proudman at ninewire dot com
        Innovative and Creative Web Design and Hosting

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael C. Gilbert [mailto:mcg at halcyon dot com]
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 9:07 AM
> To: Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk
> Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?
>
>
> At 03:03 -0700 1999.09.26, Mikael Hansen wrote:
>
>  * At 08:06 -0700 9/24/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:
>  *
>  * >Perhaps a followup question is in order then: How do I get multiple
>  * >programs (EIMS, Autoshare, a web server, a CGI environment)
> to operate well
>  * >together on the same server? Any advice?
>  *
>  * Uh, that's too general a question for me :-)
>
> You know, you're right!
>
> What I meant was this: The more Internet applications I run on the same
> server, the more they bog down and get stuck from time to time, as each
> grabs CPU time and doesn't let it go. Consequently, I've always
> run my mail
> server on a machine other than my web server. This requires that I enable
> file sharing if I want web archives of my lists. It requires additional
> hardware maintenance. Etc.
>
> -- Michael
>
>
>
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 17:09:11 +0200
From: HOnza Koudelka <koudelka at appleklub dot cz>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Remote review

>At 10:09 +0200 9/24/99, HOnza Koudelka wrote:
>
>>>The remote review is supported for the standard subscriber
>>>format only, for reasons that escape me at this time, but probably
>>>due to optional fields. You can use the Review process extender
>>>sample of type Remote.
>>
>>What does it mean? I use your internal database format, without
>>optional fields. I switched to it just because I thought it can be
>>little faster.
>
>The built-in database format is fast, but not faster than the standard.

Does it mean that the original text format (one line per subscribers) 
is not any way worse (except that it does not support optional 
fields)?

HOnza
--

If you are crazy enough, look at http://www.appleklub.cz/~koudelka/

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 09:33:04 -0700
Subject: Re: Work lists : secret
From: "Michael J. Vinca" <mjv2411 at ritvax.isc.rit dot edu>

You don't have to use the word secret, you can use any word.  You're better
off using some kind of nonsense that no one can guess.  Such as NS54ty or
something silly like that.  But you can put any name in the Work Lists box,
allowing endless possibilities.

~Mike
--
"The box said 'requires Windows95 or better', so I bought a Mac."

----------
>From: Giedo De Snijder <igiedsn at giedsn.eunet dot be>
>To: AutoShare-Talk at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk (Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk)
>Subject: Work lists : secret
>Date: Sun, Sep 26, 1999, 6:09 AM
>

> Hi,
>
> Yesterday I have tried the feature "secret".
> In the List window one can put "secret"  in Work lists.
> In EIMS you have to name your accounts for the list : secret.m and secret=
.d
> But for the file path you have to point to the real name of the .m and .d=
 file
> That works.
> But this means one can only configure 1 secret list per domain
> because you can't have 2 accounts with the same name.
> Do I think right or is there a way to by-pass this ?
> TIA,
>
> Giedo De Snijder
>
> <mailto: gds at abitmore dot be>
>
>
> ++++
>
> aBITmore
> resultaatgericht ondernemen via internet
> tel (03)360 90 69
> http://abitmore.be/
>
> ++++
>
>
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 12:35:12 -0700
Subject: Database Process Extender
From: "Michael J. Vinca" <mjv2411 at ritvax.isc.rit dot edu>

I've been doing experimenting with the Database process extender and just 
have some questions to make sure I am understanding it correctly.

The post command isn't directly sent to the extender.  Instead Autoshare
internally splits the post command into different steps.  It first sees if
the poster is subscribed, then sees if the poster can post, then queries the
list three subscribers at a time to build the digest and mail files.

If you can confirm this is correct, or tell me what is wrong with my
interpretation, then I will ask questions from there.

Sincerely,

Michael J. Vinca

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 12:42:36 -0700
From: Matthew Hill <happytwo at milepost1 dot com>
Subject: Not writing subscribers

Hello
All of a sudden when i create a new list the subscribers are not written to

the file.  They receive the subscribe email but are not added.
I remember seeing this before but can not remember how I fixed it.  anyone
have any ideas
Matthew




Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 13:02:37 -0700
From: Matthew Hill <happytwo at milepost1 dot com>
Subject: Not writing subscribers

Hi
There is more information.  When i have a document in the sub folder that
message is returned but the user is not subscribed.  However if i remove
the document out of the sub folder then it seems to work?
Again any ideas?
Matthew




Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 17:05:50 -0500
From: Michael Croft <michael at whiterose dot org>
Subject: Re: SIMS 1.8b6, AS4.0: can't figure out how to have two moderators

At 3:02 AM -0700 9/26/99, Mikael Hansen wrote:
>At 00:11 -0500 9/24/99, Michael Croft wrote:
>
>  >I have List Stuff set to 'ck' (both lower case).
>  >List Type is set to 'Moderated'
>
>That's fine. How does your problem show?

I have two accounts set up to send mail and only one of them recieves 
messages "forwarded to the moderator"  Both users look identical in 
Autoshare admin, but I get messages forwarded to the moderator and 
she does not.


>  >E-mail: has been set to a SIMS list which forwards to both of us. 
>I've also tried two addresses with various separators (','  ';').
>
>I am lost here, I'm afraid. AutoShare automatically forwards the 
>list contribution to the moderators.

I was unclear here.  In Autoshare Admin under the list tab the email 
field is set to an address which is a SIMS built-in list (i.e. any 
mail sent to the address is redirected to our two seperate accounts).

>--------------
Michael Croft                   "Babeheart?  What's it about?"
mailto:michael at whiterose dot org        "It's about a cute little pig that
http://www.whiterose.org    slaughters the English" -- Freakazoid
>--------------

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 02:58:23 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at acoustic.demon.co dot uk>
Subject: Re: Not writing subscribers

At 1:02 pm -0700 26/9/99, Matthew Hill wrote:
>Hi
>There is more information.  When i have a document in the sub folder that
>message is returned but the user is not subscribed.  However if i remove
>the document out of the sub folder then it seems to work?
>Again any ideas?
>Matthew

Yes, I suspect that your list-specific sub document doesn't contain a 
/=sub token.

( :-])  James

--
Website: <http://www.acoustic.demon.co.uk> Phone: +44 (0)1782 720368
I support the Campaign for Unmetered Telecommunications
<http://www.unmetered.org.uk/>

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 23:05:02 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Remote review

At 17:09 +0200 9/26/99, HOnza Koudelka wrote:

>Does it mean that the original text format (one line per 
>subscribers) is not any way worse (except that it does not support 
>optional fields)?

Yes.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 23:03:49 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender

At 12:35 -0700 9/26/99, Michael J. Vinca wrote:

>The post command isn't directly sent to the extender.  Instead Autoshare
>internally splits the post command into different steps.  It first sees if
>the poster is subscribed, then sees if the poster can post, then queries the
>list three subscribers at a time to build the digest and mail files.

The post command? Three subscribers at a time? Not sure what you mean.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 23:07:01 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: SIMS 1.8b6, AS4.0: can't figure out how to have two moderators

At 17:05 -0500 9/26/99, Michael Croft wrote:

>I have two accounts set up to send mail and only one of them 
>recieves messages "forwarded to the moderator"  Both users look 
>identical in Autoshare admin, but I get messages forwarded to the 
>moderator and she does not.

You definitely would want to inspect a message file processed by 
AutoShare to see if STR# 8192 contains your address only or both 
addresses.


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 23:01:23 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?

At 09:06 -0700 9/26/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:

>What I meant was this: The more Internet applications I run on the same
>server, the more they bog down and get stuck from time to time, as each
>grabs CPU time and doesn't let it go. Consequently, I've always run my mail
>server on a machine other than my web server. This requires that I enable
>file sharing if I want web archives of my lists. It requires additional
>hardware maintenance. Etc.

James could write a book on squeezing the most out of this. Mr. Berriman?


Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 15:20:15 +0100
From: James Berriman <james at acoustic.demon.co dot uk>
Subject: Re: Work lists : secret

At 3:09 pm +0200 26/9/99, Giedo De Snijder wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Yesterday I have tried the feature "secret".
>In the List window one can put "secret"  in Work lists.
>In EIMS you have to name your accounts for the list : secret.m and secret.d
>But for the file path you have to point to the real name of the .m and .d file
>That works.
>But this means one can only configure 1 secret list per domain 
>because you can't have 2 accounts with the same name.
>Do I think right or is there a way to by-pass this ?

You can use any unique name in the 'work lists' field. Consider it as 
a kind of password for the list. The idea is to hide the list 
accounts from expansion by the smtp 'expn' command in EIMS.

If you had a list called fun-l, and the expn feature enabled in EIMS, 
then a spammer could log in by smtp and issue the command 'expn 
fun-l.m' - which returns a list of subscribers.

Using the 'work lists' feature to rename the list accounts in EIMS 
will protect you from that kind of attack. Just make sure that the 
name you choose can't be guessed from the list name.

Oh, and I wouldn't recommend using the name "secret" :-)

( :-])  James

--
Website: <http://www.acoustic.demon.co.uk> Phone: +44 (0)1782 720368
I support the Campaign for Unmetered Telecommunications
<http://www.unmetered.org.uk/>

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 06:00:33 -0700
From: Matthew Hill <happytwo at milepost1 dot com>
Subject: Re: Not writing subscribers

That was it!
Thanks
Matthew

James Berriman wrote:

> At 1:02 pm -0700 26/9/99, Matthew Hill wrote:
> >Hi
> >There is more information.  When i have a document in the sub folder that
> >message is returned but the user is not subscribed.  However if i remove
> >the document out of the sub folder then it seems to work?
> >Again any ideas?
> >Matthew
>
> Yes, I suspect that your list-specific sub document doesn't contain a
> /=sub token.
>
> ( :-])  James
>
> --
> Website: <http://www.acoustic.demon.co.uk> Phone: +44 (0)1782 720368
> I support the Campaign for Unmetered Telecommunications
> <http://www.unmetered.org.uk/>
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>






Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 09:00:33 -0400
From: Charles L. Martin <clmartin at theombudsman dot com>

I have had no trouble running WebStar 3.0, AutoShare, EIMS, NetPresenz, 
AppleSearch, and Nonsequiter on an Apple Workgroup Server 6150/66 w/92mb 
RAM, OS 8.5. No problems.

On 9/27/99 2:01 AM, Mikael Hansen said:

>At 09:06 -0700 9/26/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:
>
>>What I meant was this: The more Internet applications I run on the same
>>server, the more they bog down and get stuck from time to time, as each
>>grabs CPU time and doesn't let it go. Consequently, I've always run my ma=
il
>>server on a machine other than my web server. This requires that I enable
>>file sharing if I want web archives of my lists. It requires additional
>>hardware maintenance. Etc.
>
>James could write a book on squeezing the most out of this. Mr. Berriman?


Charles L. Martin
clmartin at theOmbudsman dot com
http://www.theOmbudsman.com/Martin_Law/

Alice: ³The King seems so prejudiced.²
King: ³Thank you Alice. That¹s what makes me so eminently qualified to =
be 
Judge.²
Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll


Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 07:43:39 -0700
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender
From: "Michael J. Vinca" <mjv2411 at ritvax.isc.rit dot edu>

OK, I'm trying to trace what happens when someone posts to a list that is 
run by the database process extender.  What I came up with is what I listed
below.  Autoshare checks if the person is on the list, checks if they can
post and then builds the list using the queries hook.  I got the number
three from the following comment, but maybe that three means something else.

-- queries command
-- returns a list of queries, 3 entries per query

~Mike
--
"One clear voice, calling out for me to listen.  One clear voice, whispers
words of wisdom" --Peter Cetera "One Clear Voice"

----------
>From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
>To: AutoShare-Talk at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk (Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk)
>Subject: Re: Database Process Extender
>Date: Sun, Sep 26, 1999, 11:03 PM
>

> At 12:35 -0700 9/26/99, Michael J. Vinca wrote:
>
>>The post command isn't directly sent to the extender.  Instead Autoshare
>>internally splits the post command into different steps.  It first sees if
>>the poster is subscribed, then sees if the poster can post, then queries the
>>list three subscribers at a time to build the digest and mail files.
>
> The post command? Three subscribers at a time? Not sure what you mean.
>
>
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 08:48:13 -0700
From: "Michael C. Gilbert" <mcg at halcyon dot com>
Subject: Re: Appleshare IP or Web STAR Mail Servers?

At 09:00 -0400 1999.09.27, Charles L. Martin wrote:

 * I have had no trouble running WebStar 3.0, AutoShare, EIMS, NetPresenz,
 * AppleSearch, and Nonsequiter on an Apple Workgroup Server 6150/66 w/92mb
 * RAM, OS 8.5. No problems.

That is encouraging.

-- Michael



Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:29:46 -0700
From: "Michael C. Gilbert" <mcg at halcyon dot com>
Subject: multiple preference mess

Oh dear --

=46irst time using multiple preferences and I fear I have a mess on my hands=
=2E
I have email going out to lists with the subject prefixes from other lists
in anotehr domain. Help!

-- Michael



Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 00:51:41 -0500
From: Jeffrey Folk <jfolk at qzoneinc dot com>
Subject: Why do digests post to the list?

I have set up a private list where subscribers do not have posting
rights. This list receives e-mails from a web page form through a cgi.
There is only one subscriber with posting rights [listmaster at domain dot com]
and that subscriber does not receive mailings. When digests are
processed daily they are mailed to the list. What have I configured
wrong? I want subscribers to be able to set their preference, but at
this point everyone get digests AND individual mails. I'm usung
Autoshare 4

Thanks for any hints...
Jeff



Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 23:41:20 +0200
From: Giedo De Snijder <igiedsn at giedsn.eunet dot be>
Subject: the partial digest message after subscription

Hi,

I have a list which has to be moderated and private.
Trying to find a solution to combine them, I did the following:
The settings for a new subscriber are:
digests = no
post = no
mail = no
In the log report each day, I can see there is a new subscriber.
If it is oke, I can reset his settings to mail = yes.
But in practice a new subscriber gets after subscription a message 
from the list with subject : <list> partial digest <date>
I would like to avoid that a new subscriber even sees this partial digest.
Is there a way to configure A.S. not to send such a message after a 
new subscription or is it hardcoded in A.S.

TIA,

Giedo De Snijder

<mailto: gds at abitmore dot be>


++++

aBITmore
resultaatgericht ondernemen via internet
tel (03)360 90 69
http://abitmore.be/

++++


Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 21:27:59 +0100
From: James Berriman <listmaster at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk>
Subject: What a day today ! (serious message)

At 11:02 pm +0200 28/9/99, Giedo De Snijder wrote:

************************************************************
Message body too big (175 > 150), forwarded to the moderator
************************************************************

Hi,

Last weekend I tried out the moderated list type on a test server in 
a local network.
No problem to get what I wanted.
I did some tests because I have a client who wants ASAP a moderated 
(and also private) list.
So this morning I thought to have a quiet day.
The only thing I have got, is a lot of stress !
To keep my client happy, I use domainX.com

A)))
=46irst of all I have configured a moderated list for "a @domainX 
preference set" within the List window:
email : listmaster at domainX dot com 	name : Listmaster
address : (empty)
reply-to : list
list-help : (empty)
web path : (empty)
work lists : (empty)
Subscribers : all subscribers : not allowed to POST except the 
subscriber "Listmaster"
In EIMS the AutoShare account and the Xlist, Xlist.m, Xlist.d are 
configured properly.

When I tried it out, the following happened:
1)A subscriber send a message to Xlist at domainX dot com
2)The listmaster receives the message from AutoShare
3)The Listmaster does a redirect to (in Eudora) Xlist at domainX dot com
	In the Eudora message window of the redirect, I can see:
	From : SubscriberX <1273680895 at domainYYYY dot com> (by way of Listmaster)
4)The listmaster and only the listmaster receives a message back of AS :

To: Xlist at domainX dot com (Subscribers of Xlist)
=46rom: subscriberX <> (by way of Listmaster)
Subject: [Xlist] test 1

************************************************************
ATTENTION PLEASE
Sorry. Your message did NOT get posted or forwarded
You cannot post to a list, unless you are a subscriber
The list server address is autoshare at domainX dot com
************************************************************



************************************************************
This contribution has been forwarded to the moderator
************************************************************
here comes the content of the message send by subscriberX

5) In case the listmaster post a message himself to the 
Xlist at domainX dot com, every subscriber get the message BUT the From 
address of the message returned to the subscribers looks weird:
To: Xlist at domainX dot com (Subscribers of Xlist)
=46rom: Listmaster <1273680839 at domain dot com>
Subject: [Xlist] test listmaster
Message-Id: <350553290768022858955 at domainX dot com>

with domain.com = the default domain of the mailserver.


I have noticed after these first failures that AS did create a Xlist 
file in the LS folder of the Auto folder for this @domain BUT not a 
Xlist.m or Xlist.d file
The same happened for a second mailinglist I configured today and 
which started working "after" I created the .m and .d file for this 
list manually !!!!!

B))))
In case you can help me to solve the problem A))) (which means that 
redirected messages from the moderatorare sent to the subscribers) I 
would already a very happy man.
But there is someting more :
1) I run domainX.com with his own IP number on my W* server and the 
folder of X resides on another internal disk than the folder wherein 
W* is located.
I have put a alias folder X in the root folder of W*.
This works without problems.
In case I need to configure in the List window of Xlist the List-help 
and webpath field, I wonder what will be the field value !!!
Will this work ?
list-help : http://www.domainX.com/Xlist/archives/index.html
web path: HD2:ServerAliases:X:Xlist:archives:      OR 
HD1:Server:X:Xlist:archives:
( I think AS will not accept the HD1 path and will convert it to the HD2 pat=
h)

2) In case I need archives for a second list (name =Ylist) for domainX.com=
 :
Is it possible to set the list-help field to : 
http://www.domainX.com/Ylist/archives/index.html
and the web path accordingly
OR is there only 1 central location for the archives of all the lists 
of 1 domain ????
In that case it has to be: http://www.domainX.com/archives/index.html 
which leads you to the index.html of the subfolder Xlist and Ylist
with the list-help field for Xlist = 
http://www.domainX.com/archives/Xlist/index.html
and for the Ylist http://www.domainX.com/archives/Ylist/index.html  ??????

3) How to combine a list which is moderated + private the easiest 
way, in case it is possible?
Is there an alternative for a process extender ? I am afraid I am to 
stu.. to get that right and I don't think I have enough time to look 
at that thorougly.
The client expects that his lists will work as it should on Thurday evening.
I feel his breath in my back. really I do.
Pleas help!!!!

Here is a message from the list:

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 16:09:02 -0700

=46rom: Camelot Administrator <camelot.admin at lmco dot com>
Subject: Subscription choices
To: autoshare-talk at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk (Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk)

Hi Mikael,

Autoshare list types (according to balloon help):

OPEN: Anyone can subscribe, anyone can submit
SUBSCRIPTION: Anyone can subscribe, subscribers can submit
MODERATED: Anyone can subscribe, posts must be approved by listmaster
ANNOUNCEMENT:  Anyone can subscribe, only listmaster can post
PRIVATE: No one can subscribe, subscribers can submit

I don't see the combination that I need to use, so I'm wondering if there
are some settings I could use in conjunction with one of the above settings
to have a list which behaves as follows:

- Subscription requests go to moderator for approval
- Posts to the list go to the moderator for approval

Bill

Reply from James:

In the mean time, how about trying this:

Create a list-specific sub document with no /=sub token (including a
note that the request has been forwarded to the moderator) and add a
/=forward token to send it to the moderator.

( :-])  James

Reply from Mikael :

The /=forward token is intended for standard auto-responses only, but 
I can look into changing that.


I would really appreciate some help from you.
I am stucked and tired .....





Giedo De Snijder

<mailto: gds at abitmore dot be>


++++

aBITmore
resultaatgericht ondernemen via internet
tel (03)360 90 69
http://abitmore.be/

++++



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


Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:54:08 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: the partial digest message after subscription

At 23:41 +0200 9/29/99, Giedo De Snijder wrote:

>I have a list which has to be moderated and private.
>Trying to find a solution to combine them, I did the following:

You can configure it to moderated and omit the /=sub token from your 
sub document to make sort of private.

>Is there a way to configure A.S. not to send such a message after a 
>new subscription or is it hardcoded in A.S.

Add the letter e in the List Stuff field in the Admin.


Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:50:29 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: multiple preference mess

At 13:29 -0700 9/27/99, Michael C. Gilbert wrote:

>Oh dear --
>
>First time using multiple preferences and I fear I have a mess on my hands.
>I have email going out to lists with the subject prefixes from other lists
>in anotehr domain. Help!

Chances are that the data folders for each preference set are not 
kept separate. If you want to play it safe, do so! (with the 
exception of the folder storing the processed message file to be 
picked up by the mail server.)


Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:52:24 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Why do digests post to the list?

At 00:51 -0500 9/28/99, Jeffrey Folk wrote:

>I have set up a private list where subscribers do not have posting
>rights. This list receives e-mails from a web page form through a cgi.
>There is only one subscriber with posting rights [listmaster at domain dot com]
>and that subscriber does not receive mailings. When digests are
>processed daily they are mailed to the list. What have I configured
>wrong? I want subscribers to be able to set their preference, but at
>this point everyone get digests AND individual mails. I'm usung
>Autoshare 4

The section on Moderators in the documentation says that "The post 
subscriber option may be applied to moderators of moderated and 
announcement lists", which means that the post option is not used for 
private lists.


Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:48:25 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender

At 07:43 -0700 9/27/99, Michael J. Vinca wrote:

>OK, I'm trying to trace what happens when someone posts to a list that is
>run by the database process extender.  What I came up with is what I listed
>below.  Autoshare checks if the person is on the list, checks if they can
>post and then builds the list using the queries hook.  I got the number
>three from the following comment, but maybe that three means something else.
>
>-- queries command
>-- returns a list of queries, 3 entries per query

The "3 entries per query" means an AppleScript list holding 3 items 
of data (address, name, options) per subscriber. As for the flow, 
there is a check to see if the person is subscribed and then comes 
the other stuff. The use of the query handlers go beyond the query 
list server command.


Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 11:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Michael J. Vinca" <MJV2411 at ritvax.isc.rit dot edu>
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender

So when a contribution (post) is sent to the list, the *.d and *.m files are
built using the query call, right?

>The "3 entries per query" means an AppleScript list holding 3 items
>of data (address, name, options) per subscriber. As for the flow,
>there is a check to see if the person is subscribed and then comes
>the other stuff. The use of the query handlers go beyond the query
>list server command.



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

Michael J. Vinca


Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 12:44:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender

On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Michael J. Vinca wrote:

> So when a contribution (post) is sent to the list, the *.d and *.m files are
> built using the query call, right?

Yes, it first calls the DoSubscriberCount handler once, then repeatedly
calls the DoQueries handler to pick up 25 subscribers at a time.


Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 19:27:38 -0500
From: Jeffrey Folk <jfolk at qzoneinc dot com>
Subject: Re: Why do digests post to the list?

Mikael Hansen wrote:

> At 00:51 -0500 9/28/99, Jeffrey Folk wrote:
>
> >I have set up a private list where subscribers do not have posting
> >rights. This list receives e-mails from a web page form through a cgi.
> >There is only one subscriber with posting rights [listmaster at domain dot com]
> >and that subscriber does not receive mailings. When digests are
> >processed daily they are mailed to the list. What have I configured
> >wrong? I want subscribers to be able to set their preference, but at
> >this point everyone get digests AND individual mails. I'm using
> >Autoshare 4
>
> The section on Moderators in the documentation says that "The post
> subscriber option may be applied to moderators of moderated and
> announcement lists", which means that the post option is not used for
> private lists.
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>

I'm afraid I don't understand your response. The post/no-post rights work
fine for this list. I'm subscribed to the list but can't post, and am told
so by Autoshare in a return mail. My problem is that digests are posted to
the list when they are reset. At the moment the list.d file is empty but
digest mails are showing up in my mailbox from the list.

Ah, but just looked to see if I had forgotten something else... The list.d
and list.m mail accounts were missing! Sorry for the silly question ;-)

Thanks Mikael, for a superior Listserve product. I wish I could be as smart
as the software [author].

Jeff


Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 23:05:56 -0700
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender
From: "Michael J. Vinca" <mjv2411 at ritvax.isc.rit dot edu>

In the essence of speed can I suggest a different approach?  This may be 
kind of tough depending on the internal working of Autoshare, but could
there be a parameter that had the path to the list to build and have the
extender build the list?  This puts all the processing power on the extender
and I think would make things faster.  So there would be an event called
build list, and the extender would get the path of the list, who was posting
(so as to acknowledge the acknowledgment setting), and what kind of list to
build (message vs. digest).  When the extender was done building the list,
it would just return and then Autoshare would send out the mail.

I think I see a flaw in my idea, but I'm not sure in my limited
understanding.  Is it possible that the event would time out before
completed?  Is that why you call for 25 subscribers at a time?  To avoid
such time outs?
--
"One clear voice, calling out for me to listen.  One clear voice, whispers
words of wisdom" --Peter Cetera "One Clear Voice"

----------
>From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
>To: AutoShare-Talk at frutiger.staffs.ac dot uk (Subscribers of AutoShare-Talk)
>Subject: Re: Database Process Extender
>Date: Thu, Sep 30, 1999, 12:44 PM
>

> On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Michael J. Vinca wrote:
>
>> So when a contribution (post) is sent to the list, the *.d and *.m files are
>> built using the query call, right?
>
> Yes, it first calls the DoSubscriberCount handler once, then repeatedly
> calls the DoQueries handler to pick up 25 subscribers at a time.
>
>
>
> **  The AutoShare-Talk archives are at:
> **  <http://frutiger.staffs.ac.uk/autoshare/archives/>

Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 07:30:37 +0200
From: Giedo De Snijder <igiedsn at giedsn.eunet dot be>
Subject: Moderated lists for a @domain

Hi,

I keep it short because my first message concerning the same 
questions didn't get this list because it was too long.

1) Anyone has experience with running a moderated list for a @domain 
with address protection on
	(@domain is running on his own IP number on the machine)

2) Anyone has experience with running webarchives for such a @domain 
while the location of the domain's webfolder is not in WebSTAR' root 
folder but on a second internal disk on the same machine?
	(there is only a alias of the domain's folder in WebSTAR's root folder)
What have you entered in the List-Help en Web Path field in the List 
window ? and does it work ?

Thank you for your attention.

Giedo De Snijder

<mailto: gds at abitmore dot be>


++++

aBITmore
resultaatgericht ondernemen via internet
tel (03)360 90 69
http://abitmore.be/

++++


Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 23:14:14 +0100
From: Bill Bedford <billbpm at mousa.demon.co dot uk>
Subject: Problems with polls

I been trying to set up a poll with keys. The keys are set up in 'STR 
' resources 1002 and 1001, but when I feed messages into autoshare 
only two STR# resources are created. which means the poll only ever 
shows two votes, what am I doing wrong?

The ordinary poll works as expected.

-- 
Bill Bedford                            mailto://billb at mousa.demon.co dot uk

Kids!  Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous.  Do not attempt it in
your home.
-- 
Bill Bedford                            mailto://billb at mousa.demon.co dot uk

Kids!  Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous.  Do not attempt it in
your home.

Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:32:43 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Why do digests post to the list?

At 19:27 -0500 9/30/99, Jeffrey Folk wrote:

>Mikael Hansen wrote:
>
>  > The section on Moderators in the documentation says that "The post
>  > subscriber option may be applied to moderators of moderated and
>  > announcement lists", which means that the post option is not used for
>  > private lists.

>I'm afraid I don't understand your response.

Yes, I was a bit brief there. I was responding within the context of 
the applying the post option to the special moderators feature, which 
forwards the message to be moderated to those subscribers who have 
the post option set. It is correct that the post option works for all 
list types in the basic sense of being able to post versus not.

>The post/no-post rights work fine for this list. I'm subscribed to 
>the list but can't post, and am told so by Autoshare in a return 
>mail. My problem is that digests are posted to the list when they 
>are reset. At the moment the list.d file is empty but digest mails 
>are showing up in my mailbox from the list.
>
>Ah, but just looked to see if I had forgotten something else... The list.d
>and list.m mail accounts were missing! Sorry for the silly question ;-)

Now I'm afraid I don't understand. How could the digests be mailed to 
the list when the list.d mail account was missing?


Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:33:38 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Database Process Extender

At 23:05 -0700 9/30/99, Michael J. Vinca wrote:

>In the essence of speed can I suggest a different approach?  This may be
>kind of tough depending on the internal working of Autoshare, but could
>there be a parameter that had the path to the list to build and have the
>extender build the list?  This puts all the processing power on the extender
>and I think would make things faster.  So there would be an event called
>build list, and the extender would get the path of the list, who was posting
>(so as to acknowledge the acknowledgment setting), and what kind of list to
>build (message vs. digest).  When the extender was done building the list,
>it would just return and then Autoshare would send out the mail.
>
>I think I see a flaw in my idea, but I'm not sure in my limited
>understanding.

The flaw is essentially that your script would have to do (and be 
responsible for) parsing the subscriber options and updating the 
files, which the AutoShare server is doing already. A script doing 
this is furthermore likely to slow down things considerably. Parsing 
the subscriber options is a delicate matter not to be taken lightly 
(requires various calls to the AutoShare server to be in sync with 
the configuration), and while it is indeed possible scriptwise to 
update the m and d files (but not actually replace the functionality 
at the time it is needed), I am hesitant to hand over the 
responsibility of a core aspect of the server processing to a 
free-wheeling script, whose actions are entirely beyond the scope of 
the AutoShare server.

>Is it possible that the event would time out before completed?  Is 
>that why you call for 25 subscribers at a time?  To avoid such time 
>outs?

This number is set so for memory reasons.


Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:34:33 -0700
From: Mikael Hansen <meh at dnai dot com>
Subject: Re: Problems with polls

At 23:14 +0100 10/1/99, Bill Bedford wrote:

>I been trying to set up a poll with keys. The keys are set up in 
>'STR ' resources 1002 and 1001, but when I feed messages into 
>autoshare only two STR# resources are created. which means the poll 
>only ever shows two votes, what am I doing wrong?

Nothing. It's me. Thanks for pointing this out. I'll get back to you.