[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list
Frédéric L . W . Meunier
Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list problem (Was Re: lynx-dev What happened to MINGW patch? (fwd)))
Sat, 7 Feb 2004 13:22:01 -0200 (BRST)
On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, 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:
> > 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.
Again for historical reasons.
If FLORA.org ever fix it so the archives don't get any spam,
would it be so hard to remove all HTML files that have
lynx-dev-archive#flora.org in the To: header ? That accounts
for 99% of the spam. It's exactly what I did with Pine, setting
a filter to remove it. Then I went through the rest manually
and used 'D'. I could have removed everything with no
lynx-dev#sig.net in the To: or Cc: header, but wasn't so sure.
(# = @)
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden