On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 1:07 AM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote:

> Magnus,
> * Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
> > It would make the URLs actually short, but as mentioned upthread, that
> > wouldn't work at all if offline. So it'd be a tradeoff between those, but
> > so are pretty much all other options that don't include the full
> message-id.
> This is a bit of a crazy idea, but in the new list system, couldn't we
> add a header which includes "our" surrogate message-id?  Or possibly the
> entire URL to the message, and maybe the URL for the entire thread?

I'd rather not tie those systems in that tightly. I think they are much
better off being de-coupled.

That said, what we could do is invent our own "id". We could either use a
separate surrogate key, or we could do the sha-1 hash of the messageid. And
stick that in a header, which could then be searched for both locally and

 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

Reply via email to