On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 09:32:01PM -0700, Ka-Ping Yee wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jul 2003, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > NNTP. > > You do realize that what we are doing is rebuilding much of > what NNTP is supposed to do, don't you?
Of course I do. That's precisely why I recommended you use the infrastructure and tools already extant. > That's slightly tongue-in-cheek -- but only slightly. Multiple > sites aggregating articles, sharing articles with each other, > updating each other on new posts: it's been done, and it's called > Usenet. Of course we're adding user authentication, nice graphics, > and more structured data -- but it's worth noting that Usenet > didn't work by having every site poll every other site for updates. > > Just something to think about. And it's *also* worth noting that it's *miserable* -- I mean *REALLY REALLY* painful, to follow more than about 4 web forums, run on different sites, hosted by different software packages, with different command structures, and different signons. Stipulated, some percentage of the crowd will *only* ever go here... but I'm inclined to think that's a smaller percentage than might seem obvious... and that the proper solution is to build a web-based NNTP client front end and use the already existant infrastructure which is tuned for that, instead of rebuilding the wheel. MIME is not real popular on traditional Usenet, but no reason you can't use it in a custom implementation on top... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c
