Return-Path: <ERIC@SEARN.SUNET.SE>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:22:14 +0100
From:         Eric Thomas <ERIC@SEARN.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: PD Unix Listserv ListServer?
              7 Jan 1993 11:20:17 EST from "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7"
              <LSTSRV-L@SEARN>

All this misinformation is really getting  annoying. Here is a copy of my
standard reply  to people  who ask me  for the unix  version of  my code,
which I already sent privately to the person who started this thread.

  Eric
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, this "canned" message was written in November 1992, and for
the sole purpose of  saving time to its author by  attempting to answer a
frequently asked question. The information  it contains may be inaccurate
both because  the author is  not a  cornucopia of Internet  knowledge and
because  of the  intrinsically  ephemeral nature  of  information in  our
network. Corrections  will be accepted,  but complaints are best  sent to
your local shredder.

In case you  are not familiar with list servers,  here is some background
information to  help you understand  the rest  of this message.  The name
LISTSERV comes  from a popular mailing  list manager used on  BITNET. The
first version was written around 1984, maybe even earlier, if you find an
exact date  please let me know.  The current version was  started in 1986
under the name  "Revised LISTSERV", and users stopped  saying "revised" a
couple years  later as nobody was  running the original code  any longer.
This software only runs under VM; you may have heard otherwise from other
people,  but that  only  means  that there  has  been a  misunderstanding
somewhere along the chain of  information. Due to the unbelievable amount
of people who saw  but then lost a posting by someone  who swore he knows
where to find a fully-compatible port  of the BITNET LISTSERV for unix, I
really must  insist that this  is incorrect information, and  rather than
giving you a lame  apology I will just suggest that you  skip the rest of
this paragraph  if you are  already convinced.  If not, well,  the BITNET
LISTSERV  is written  in REXX,  PASCAL and  S/370 assembler,  not C,  and
totals about 60k lines of source code. If you find a full port that takes
200 lines of perl code, then by all means do introduce me to its author -
I have a job  for him. As for people who claim they  know someone who ran
the REXX, PASCAL and S/370 assembler  code through a C converter and then
compiled it,  they are  probably quoting from  something posted  on April
1st. If  you still  think I  am trying  to hide  something for  fear that
people would stop  using my software, let  me add LISTSERV is  not in the
public domain and thus  any port based on compiling the  source code on a
different machine without my explicit  permission would be illegal, so it
really wouldn't  be in my  interest to claim  that no such  animal exists
when I could sue someone for copyright violation if it did.

As far  as VMS  is concerned,  both PMDF  and MX  come with  mailing list
managers  which, while  not as  sophisticated  as LISTSERV,  can be  good
enough in many cases. You will  find newsgroups for both PMDF (commercial
product) and MX (free) in usenet under the vmsnet hierarchy. You might be
able to coerce  POSIX into running one  of the unix list  managers, but I
disclaim any  responsibility for any  psychic disorder that  might result
from such an attempt. My advice is to stick to what your mailer provides,
although you may  want to give MX  a try if you are  using something else
and you are not satisfied with what it has to offer.

Now, there  are scores of  unix versions which claim  to be ports  of the
BITNET LISTSERV but do not even  have compatible syntax and seldom exceed
a  couple hundred  lines  of perl.  There are  2-3  versions which  stand
clearly  above the  rest of  the  crowd, in  terms  of life  span if  not
compatibility. Because I do NOT plan to  update this FAQ every week, I am
not going to give you a list - I  trust that you will be able to sort out
the 200-liners and find up-to-date information in usenet.

I do have a  recommendation to make, though. As of  this writing the most
robust and most  functional unix list manager would seem  to be Mailbase.
That alone makes it one of the 2-3 I mentioned above, but the reason I am
going to recommend it is that, unlike the others, it does not claim to be
a unix port  of LISTSERV and makes  it very clear to the  users that they
are dealing with another piece of software with different syntax and this
considerably decreases  the amount  of bug reports  and complaints  I get
from  confused users.  Mailbase works  with at  least SunOS  and you  can
contact Jill Foster <Jill.Foster@Newcastle.AC.UK> for more information. I
cannot guarantee that Mailbase will work  in your environment or that the
people who funded its  development will give you a copy  on terms you can
accept; I am merely suggesting that, if I were in your situation, I would
try to get Mailbase rather than any of the programs which call themselves
'unix listserv version x.y' and do not even use the same command syntax.

One last reason  for using Mailbase is, precisely, that  I and many other
BITNET people  resent the use  of expressions such  as 'unix port  of the
bitnet listserv' on documentation,  advertisements and sometimes each and
every mail  header, when  the software  in question is  not based  on the
BITNET LISTSERV at all and  in fact totally incompatible. Fortunately not
all unix list managers make these sorts of claims, but unfortunately none
of the  people I kindly  asked to  use another name,  or at least  a less
ambiguous terminology, even  considered the possibility to  oblige me; in
the best cases  I got a short rebuttal without  any justification, in the
worst cases a stream of  insults accompanied with feebleminded references
to  the US  constitution. I  eventually  gave up,  but you  will want  to
consider the  implications of passively  endorsing this sort  of attitude
before choosing one  of the programs in question to  run a highly-visible
service in your organization: there are many user-support people who know
how to  present that  case to  academic management and  may be  unable to
resist their anger  after wasting 10 minutes on a  so-called unix port of
LISTSERV for the 5th time in the day.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU