Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:01 AM, Michael McCandless (JIRA)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Spinoff from here:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-java-user/200809.mbox/%3Cba72f77f0809111418l29cf215dnd45bf679832d7d42%40mail.gmail.com%3E
I had to go to another email archive to find your responses.
The useability of the official apache email archives really isn't
great.
What do people think of using other email archives to reference
threads?
The danger is that they could go away some day, destroying contextual
information.
But every time someone references something from
mail-archives.apache.org, I need to click on it and cut-n-paste the
title into a more sane email archive like nabble or markmail.
I tend to use nabble, and one nice thing is that the URLs seem to
contain the subject, which really enhances the ability to put things
back together (search for it in other email archives) if they ever did
go away.
Example:
http://www.nabble.com/segment-exists-in-external-directory-yet-the-MergeScheduler-executed-the-merge-in-a-separate-thread-to19445022.html#a19445022
Thoughts?
Excellent question!
Indeed I use apache.org to minimize risk that it will ever go away.
But I don't like its usability either.
I very much like nabble.com's use of the subject line in the URL (I
hadn't noticed that); that's even better risk mitigation. I'll switch
to nabble.
I think we should also get in the habbit of not relying on the link to
provide too much context of the opened issue, so that search engines
can find the issue and not just the thread; it should only be needed
for fallback context. Probably in this issue I should also (in
addition to my response) have included details of the opening email
(eg the exception).
Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
