Greetings from Tacoma, WA, USA, hometown of Lee Boyd Malvo, Dan! On Tuesday, June 19, in the 2007th year of our Lord, you wrote:
>>>> On 17/06/07, Charles Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> FYI: I downloaded planetplanet and reworked the templates and css for the >>>>> planet website. I sent Xentac (Jason), the results last night so >>>>> hopefully >>>>> there will be a nicer planet site within the next few days. >>>>> You can see a a preview at http://xtermin.us/archplanet/ >> And now you can see the real thing: http://planet.archlinux.org/ > > Is there any reason why Roberto and Jeff's posts seem to always be > near the top, even though the actual dates of those posts were much > earlier? (Nov 7, 2005 and April 21st, 2007 respectively.) Is it an > issue with their RSS feed, or planet itself? Neither of their feeds provide published date information. Roberto's feed provides only a last generated date for the entire feed. I do not think that RSS 0.92 actually defined a published date or even allowed for date information in individual posts. Roberto publishes a rss2.0 (and an atom 1.0) feed which both provide that date information. http://roberto.stinkybug.cl/blog/feed/ http://roberto.stinkybug.cl/blog/feed/atom/ Switching to either should provide an improvement. I don't see any date information (at all) in Jeff's feed. It's rss2.0, but for whatever reason the date info is omitted. My guess is that the planet software records the date it first sees the <item> and creates an md5sum of the content. If the md5sum changes in some way or the planet is rebuilt from scratch the post gets pushed to the top as the most "current". -- Take it easy, Charles FSF Apologist, WikiNut, Concrete Analyst, etc. JABBER: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GIZMO: charlesmauch AIM: cmauch5 Please send personal email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :: This sucks. Lemme try that blue pill now. _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
