>>>Anthony: From looking at this, it seems I've become the de-facto leader.
>>Adrian: You've certainly been mentioned in there a lot. :) After reading
>>the archive though, I don't think there really is *a* leader.
>Anthony: I guess it depends on how you define 'leader' :)
Adrian: Leader: a guiding or leading head, as of army movement, etc. I
honestly don't think we have one of those, we have many people who
alternate in different situations. Most people have found a role for
themselves in the group though. We have encouragers, work horses,
advisers, "silence breakers" who step in when things seem to have come to
a standstill and get things moving again, lurkers, and many more. Plus,
many combinations of the above.
>>The
>>leadership of the group changes to whoever has the best ability to lead
>>at the time and on that topic. It's very good to see.
>
>Yes, certainly is. I wonder if we even need an official leader? Probably not.
Adrian: I think eventually we will when the everyday, tedius (yet
important) decisions build up. We need someone to make them quickly and
only debated by the whole group if there are objections.
>>Adrian: How do the links to the mail archive work? ie: If I had the name
>>of the thread in variable threadName (properly URL encoded) how would I
>>turn that into the URL to the thread in the archive? (Java code would be
>>great, C's fine though or just english).
>
>Anthony: Ummm.... in C++ it'd look like this:
>
> string GetMailArchiveUrl(string subject) {
> static Psychic knower_of_all
> return knower_of_all.Truth(subject);
> }
>
><g>
Adrian: Well if you can't do it, there's no hope of me doing it. :) I'm
never online when I'm mainting the log so I won't be able to do it by
hand. I may be able to check out how the archives work and implement it
later, but not right now.
>Anthony: They seem to be done by message number. You'd have to know the
message
>number in the order it appeared in the mail archive. Not easy to do.
Adrian: Messages simply won't be linked, but threads will be able to, I'd
image it's just a CGI with the thread name being passed in somehow. I'll
see, but later.
>Anthony: If oyu wanted to automate the process, you'd have to grep the mail
>archive webpages.
Adrian: No. This is not a viable way of doing it.
>>Anthony: Also, there are HTML errors.
>Anthony: Run it through the W3C validator (<http://validator.w3.org/>). Or
grab
>a copy of iCab (<http://www.icab.de>). Either one will show them.
Adrian: There are a few *minor* HTML discrepencies. Point iCab at
www.w3c.com and look how many errors in that page. Don't be too picky -
it works. :) There may be an HTML standard, but just about noone
follows it perfectly. (BTW the page validator.w3.org returns has a page
full of errors.)
>Anthony: OK. It's no big deal, as long as it is not a bug. BTW: What do you do
>in the event of a duplicate file name?
Adrian: Reduce it to one file under that name. Never quite sure which one
will wind up there and which one will be lost though... It just doesn't
deal with this yet. I did have a much better system but it produced file
names longer than 31 characters so it was no good. I'll get around to
fixing it up one day. Still I've got 4.29e9 unique names in this system
so I'm not expecting a conflict too soon. The chances of a duplicate
hashCode is very low, and this is just a quick and dirty tool for my
personal use.
