On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 14:40:48 +0000 Richard Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 29 Nov 2003, at 13:32, J C Lawrence wrote: >> On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 07:12:45 +0000 Richard Barrett >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On 29 Nov 2003, at 00:48, J C Lawrence wrote:
>> For me, and (possibly) for Mailman v3, critical. I use Message IDs >> as a primary key for my list archives, indexing and several other >> bits. Changing them, at any point, breaks that. > I confess I was not gazing that far into the future and, not being a > Mailman developer, have no influence or knowledge of the architecture > of Mailman v3. This area was discussed on this list extensively a few weeks ago. I suggest reading the archives. > However, offering an immediate fix for an arguably valid criticism of > the current stable release that would not have a major destabilizing > effect on that stable release seems worthwhile to me. Fair dinkum, and I've not argued otherwise. > It seems from what you say that your archiving and indexing solution > is not standard Mailman internal pipermail archiving so the poor fit > of the solution offered with your system is unsurprising. The archiving system I use is also what I've advocated for Mailman v3, with some level of buy-in. > Bear in mind that the patch only affects the data delivered in > response to HTTP requests. Right, one of the levels I use Message IDs is the user-level, in HTML, in archives, in URLs, and in raw messages. Users regularly quote Message IDs in their messages as text strings ala: Have a look at message [EMAIL PROTECTED] as it goes into this area further and explains several of the bits you are asking about. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. [EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
