Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list problem (Was Re: lynx-dev What happened to MINGW patch? (fwd)))

[Frédéric L . W . Meunier]

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, Thomas Dickey wrote:

> On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Frédéric L. W. Meunier wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Frédéric L. W. Meunier wrote:
> > >
> > Maybe it could be done ? Why not, after all it's the same if
> > Bob forwarded them to the new list. Better let people know
> > about the move immediately and don't have to deal with all the
> > spam from the old list. If they really want to contact
> > lynx-dev, they'll know how to do once they read the message.
>
> Yes - the first thing to do is to turn off the spam (modify the process
> so the archives only get what's sent to the mailing list).  Cleaning up
> the archives can be done second.

What do you mean ? I already cleaned most archives, and
Savannah doesn't archive spam.

What I meant was that we have 3 options if someone sends a
message to the old lynx-dev:

1- Ignore it, what's probably being done, as I don't see any
moderation for non subscribers.

2- Send back a message about the move. Their original message
could be included, just in case they don't save a copy.

3- Redirect it to Savannah for moderation, and as a bonus we
deal with the spam from the old lynx-dev. By spam I mean most
messages from non subscribers that currently go to it.

> > > I'm told that the "real" archives aren't in mbox form, but as
> > > a database.
> >
> > Because they wrote "Web-based reader of archive (Importing all
> > articles we could find)." ?
>
> That was what Russell McOrmond said.  Among other things:
>   To solve the problem you need to solve two independent issues:
>
>   a) Who has the time and trust of the community to do the pruning?

Remove the spam ? I did it.

>   b) People are linking directly to message URL's -- if you remove a
>      message from the mailbox archive and then re-run MHonArc then all the
>      message numbers (and URL's) change.

Removing the spam is so we get a clean archive at Savannah, not
to clean FLORA.org. You're righy about the URL's changing, but
I guess there's no way to make the FLORA.org archives link to
the ones from Savannah, even if we maintain the same messages
in both.

And if we don't want to break the URLs, we can't remove the
spam from FLORA.org. They can cure the disease, but not the
damage it has done in the last years.

So, instead of what I proposed, redirecting all links under
http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/ to the main page of the new
archives, add a note to

http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/

and

http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/

about the new archives, and maintain the old, with the spam,
for historical reasons ?

-- 
http://www.pervalidus.net/contact.html

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden