[Mailman-Developers] Virtual Domains Redux (w proposal)

[Rich Johnson]

> [...snip...]
>
> I think we're drifting here from a logical format.  If there is to  
> be shared
> ownership, I think that needs to be done with a different  
> database.  It could
> be a nightmare from the admin side if you group things by who wants  
> to own
> what lists, rather than by domain.  I believe the initial point  
> behind the
> start of this is that list at foo and list at bar should be able to  
> cohabitate on
> the same install.

Not quite.    It depends on your interpretation of what 'cohabitate'  
means.

As the initiator, I'll chime in with the following:

_processed_ by the same install? yes.
  _cohabitate_? perhaps.  But this is a site and/or  domain  
administrator configuration decision--and not imposed by the  
developer.  I've been pretty consistent about my aversion to  
comingling data from separate domains in the same tree.  I view the  
domain split as _more_ important that the virtual service provided-- 
be it apache vhosts, exim vusers, or mailman.  Ideally it could be a  
mount point.

IMO:
- Ephemeral data such as queues and logs might or might not cohabit.
- Persistent data such as list configuration, subscriber lists, and  
archives must be severable
- HTTP and mail message templates probably require list->sub-domain- 
 >base-domain->site scoping  [N.B.  I'm still thinking about my  
position on this issue]

A good part of this discussion seems to revolve around whether  
mailman ''plays well with others''.  Where the ''others'' are  
amorphously defined.