Johannes Berg writes:
> On Fri, 2018-09-28 at 23:01 +0200, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> I have looked at gnus and there is support in there for performing
>> searches via the old gmane web interface. Public inbox already provides
>> an attribute that tells you what the web server is. So all
Johannes Berg writes:
> Sorry to just jump into an old thread; I was wondering about IMAP server
> support as well, in particular because unlike NNTP that allows pushing
> the search to the server, and that would be useful for local archives.
>
>> Hosting an IMAP/POP3 server is way more overhead
Sorry to just jump into an old thread; I was wondering about IMAP server
support as well, in particular because unlike NNTP that allows pushing
the search to the server, and that would be useful for local archives.
> Hosting an IMAP/POP3 server is way more overhead for the admin
> as it requires
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> I believe we can modify the msg number assignment to assign numbers to
> deletes as well as adds. Short of the same Message-ID coming up twice
> that should be enough for the current backwards loop to assign message
> ids reliably. And even Message-IDs comming up
Eric Wong writes:
> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes:
>> > Eric Wong writes:
>> >> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Because of the parallelism in V2 I have noticed messages in numbered
>> >>> in an order that does not correspond to their
Eric Wong writes:
> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> > "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> >> Eric Wong writes:
>> > As far as personal mail goes, I wouldn't want serial numbers at all
>> > (more unnecessary state to keep track of).
>>
>> At least imap requires serial numbers, and I imagine the easy
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> > "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> >> Eric Wong writes:
> > As far as personal mail goes, I wouldn't want serial numbers at all
> > (more unnecessary state to keep track of).
>
> At least imap requires serial numbers, and I imagine the easy transition
> for mail
Eric Wong writes:
> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> Eric Wong writes:
>> > "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> >> Then I am going to report a probable bug. In V2 in public-inbox-index
>> >> I can not find a path from finding a 'd' file and a call to unindex. V1
>> >> unindexes deleted files.
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes:
> > Eric Wong writes:
> >> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Because of the parallelism in V2 I have noticed messages in numbered
> >>> in an order that does not correspond to their commit order. So the
> >>>
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> Eric Wong writes:
> > "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> >> Then I am going to report a probable bug. In V2 in public-inbox-index
> >> I can not find a path from finding a 'd' file and a call to unindex. V1
> >> unindexes deleted files. Rebased heads for purges call
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes:
> Eric Wong writes:
>
>> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>>>
>>> Because of the parallelism in V2 I have noticed messages in numbered
>>> in an order that does not correspond to their commit order. So the
>>> SQLite database isn't as recoverable as
Eric Wong writes:
> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> Eric Wong writes:
>> > "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> >> I have been digging through the code looking so I can understand the v2
>> >> format and I have some ideas on how things might be improved, and some
>> >> questions so that I understand.
Eric Wong writes:
> "Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>> I have been digging through the code looking so I can understand the v2
>> format and I have some ideas on how things might be improved, and some
>> questions so that I understand.
>
> Great to know you're interested! Fwiw, I've still been
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> I have been digging through the code looking so I can understand the v2
> format and I have some ideas on how things might be improved, and some
> questions so that I understand.
Great to know you're interested! Fwiw, I've still been meaning
to turn my v2 docs into
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 03:01:53PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Names. Is there a good reason not to use message numbers as the names
> in the git repositories? (Other than the cost to change the code?) That
> would remove the need for treat the sqlite msgmap database as precious,
> and it
I have been digging through the code looking so I can understand the v2
format and I have some ideas on how things might be improved, and some
questions so that I understand.
V1 supported the concept of messages being added and deleted from
the git repository all while keeping a full history of
16 matches
Mail list logo
