Re: bug with the Message-ID ?

[Pawel Salek <pawsa TheoChem kth se>]

On 2001.12.03 13:04 M. Thielker wrote:
> I would opt for adding an option to sippress the message id 
> completely, not based on any checks or the port number but with a 
> simple checkbox on prefs.
> Most systems currently in use will use port 25 for submission as well 
> as forwarding and will distinguish between the two by the recipients 
> address. Some, like CIS, will not accept a message id if the 
> transaction is deemed to be a submission.
> Forcing Balsa to use a port other than 25 for this to work will only 
> serve to limit Balsa's usability because a corporation as big as CIS 
> _will_ not change the way their server works just because _one_ 
> program requires it.

Justa personal opinion: I am not religious about Linux replacing 
Windows on desktop, I just want it to work and interoperate with other 
computers. This is done *best* by being 100% compliant with standards. 
The problem here is not with balsa, it is with Compuserve, and this is 
where the problem should be fixed, IMO. Compuserve may be big, but it 
is still dependent on its customers (easy to say, I am not one of 
them). I would rather fix real balsa problems that cause problems for 
80% of the users, than problems that affect, say, 1%.

Just my 0.02zlp.

/pawel
-- 
Pawel Salek (pawsa@theochem.kth.se) http://www.theochem.kth.se/~pawsa/
Theoretical Chemistry Division, KTH