Обсуждение: Archived-At message header
Hi, What are the chances that, if we're going to fix the problem of archive boundaries at month end, we can do it with http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5064.txt? I just learned about this header, and it sure seems like it'd be useful. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@commandprompt.com +1 503 667 4564 x104 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Hi, > > What are the chances that, if we're going to fix the problem of > archive boundaries at month end, we can do it with > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5064.txt? I just learned about this > header, and it sure seems like it'd be useful. Can't we do this already, since our archives can be accessed by messageid? /Magnus
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Hi, > > What are the chances that, if we're going to fix the problem of > archive boundaries at month end, we can do it with > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5064.txt? I just learned about this > header, and it sure seems like it'd be useful. It would be neat, but I'm not sure it can be done, because the WWW archives are handled very far away from where the message is distributed. Hmm, but 3.2 talks about using Message-Id for generating URLs that will work permanently. Interesting. There's even software for managing it. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 03:56:56PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Can't we do this already, since our archives can be accessed by messageid? We do, approximately. The cool trick about this is that it's a _message_ header, so it actually comes with the message. The RFC includes a pointer to w3c code that will generate these headers on the way by based on Message-ID, yes. I guess what I was thinking is that the threading-across-month issue could be solved by using these headers as the basis for building the thread back up. Maybe it's a dumb idea, though. (Nobody would accuse me of never having dumb ideas in public.) A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@commandprompt.com +1 503 667 4564 x104 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > I guess what I was thinking is that the threading-across-month issue > could be solved by using these headers as the basis for building the > thread back up. Maybe it's a dumb idea, though. (Nobody would accuse > me of never having dumb ideas in public.) I've also thought about this in the past. I don't think it's a dumb idea -- perhaps it can be made to work. I'm hesitant to continue to build kluges on top of Mhonarc, though. (I tried to get Abhijit Menon-Sen interested in exploring the idea of using Archivopteryx to drive our archives, but he seems to have even less time for experimentation with such things than I do.) -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:01:36AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Hmm, but 3.2 talks about using Message-Id for generating URLs that will > work permanently. Interesting. There's even software for managing it. Yeah. That's why I think it's a nifty idea. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@commandprompt.com +1 503 667 4564 x104 http://www.commandprompt.com/