Re: [Exim] Exim setup done and it works ok, but...

On Wed, 19 Jul 2000, Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, The awesome and feared Dave C. commented thusly,
>
> > > Just see the difference between "Update your program version" and
> > > "please update your program version", it makes things much more
> > > easier to the user especially when you are fuming..
> > >
> > > Just see why many people like windoze, it's because of it's user friendly
> > > attitude.
> > >
> > > I have been developing software for some time and I find that if a app has
> > > kind and has informative error messages and is user friendly, people will
> > > continue to come back to use it...
> >
> > Informative, yes. I fail to see the point of 'kind'. Now, I dont
> > advocate outrightly hostile messages either - error messages should be
> > specific and to the point, and contain any details necesarry - but why
> > should they waste space and time trying to pretend the computer is your
> > best friend - its a tool, nothing more.
>
> Well the computer maybe a tool but please don't forget that it interacts
> with humans and *not* robots. The dull and lifeless error messages you
> suggest would be good if the user was a robot.

Im not suggesting any specific messages. I am just saying there really
is no good reason for them to be cute and witty.

>
> But say after composing your 1000 word message and all of a sudden the
> program GPF's and all your work was lost and you were fuming, wouldn't it
> drive you off your nut if the system just says "GPF program terminated",
> without a more detailed kind message.

You will note I did specifically indicate that error messages should be
"specific and to the point, and contain necesarry details". But having
it say "Im sorry Mr user-person, I tried really hard to run your
program and crunched my chips as hard as I could.... etc.." is just a
waste..

> > > i. This is the qmail-send program at web.lu. I'm afraid I wasn't able
> > > to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent
> > > error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> > >
> > > In the above "chatty" messsage generated by the qmail program, it clearly
> > > says "This is the qmail-send **program**"
> >
> >
> > "This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
>
> OK..what is this mysterious mail delivery software, there is *abosolutely*
> nothing to say that this was created by Exim, and not sendmail etc.

Why on earth should it matter what BRAND of mail delivery software is
being run? If the gas tank in your car is empty, do you really give a
crap which company manufactured the tank?

Especially to an end user, who is going to know sendmail from
Foobarmail? (And to an technically proficient end user, they body is
going to be useless anyway - they will want to see the headers, which
amazingly enough DO contain what specific type of mail software you are
using)

>
> >
> > A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
> > recipients. The following address(es) failed:"
> >
> > Why is this any less clearer? The answer is that it isnt - but neither
>
> Wrong pal, the qmail message is more clearer, it says that is a *permanent
> error*, the above Exim message doesn't say so. Well according to your
> logistics there would be many users who would assume that the MTA will
> keep on trying to deliver and that they don't have to check the address
> etc.
>
> So as you can see not only is the Exim message not informative enough, it
> is less clearer that the qmail message. If users are as dumb as you
> propese then surely I can see Exim MAILER_DAEMONS getting more messages
> like "hey mailer daemon, has this failed permanently", "hey what am I
> suppose to do next" etc..

It is clear that it was sent by a program to anyone that can
read. Anyone with a clue will realize that you can't, (for the most
part) engage in english conversation with a program, and if they have
further questions, they should contact LOCAL (eg, their OWN ISP or
company help desk) for help.

> FWIW this was the reason for me to originally start this post about
> how to go about changing the bounce message..
>
> > one will jump off the screen, and force themselves into a persons brain
> > - they have to OPEN THEIR EYES and READ IT.
>
> Many users do so my friend. It's that IMHO when comparing the above two
> bounce messages I find that the qmail message is more friendly, more
> informative (gives a idea about the software at work, and the error
> status)...well now what do you have to say to that :)

"You message could not be delivered" should be sufficient for anyone
with a clue. Eg, just as "STOP" should be sufficient for someone
driving to realize they need to do just that. Perhaps we should have
big posters explaining what STOP means, along with a brand
identification of the stop-sign manufacturer at street corners?

>
> > >
> > > Best Wishes,
> > > Grendel
> >
> > Sigh.. I didn't really mean to make this into a rant. I just feel very
> > stronnly on this, and another discussion in another forum about
> > 'dumbing down' an interface on a system I work on to reduce the amount
> > of thinking the user had to do had just set me off when I started..
>
> Hey no problem no offence taken, it sure is great to hear about different
> views.
>
> Once again Best Wishes,
> Grendel
> >
> > -DJC
> ^^^^^^
> Any relation of DJB??

I can't think of any relation to anyone with those initials, no..

>
>
>
> Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
> :)
>
>

--