Re: url for TODO item, is it right?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: url for TODO item, is it right?
Date: 2006-07-19 03:52:36
Message-ID: 20060719035236.GI4963@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> 'k, so is the concensus here that I regenerate everything with the 'broken
> msg seperator', and then revert to the unbroken one for new stuff? its no
> sweat, I just fear this is going to re-crop up sometime in the future if
> we ever have to regenerate from the mbox files, as well have some in
> 'broken format' and some in the 'unbroken', but renumbering *then* will
> still affect everything ...

One idea is to keep the old archives using the broken separator, and
regenerate the good archives in some other directory, or with a
different prefix (say, instead of msg0234.php have it be named
mesg0234.php or msg0234.1.php, etc). That way the old URLs would
continue to work, and there wouldn't be a problem if the archives need
to be regenerated in the future.

OTOH it would be good to have a collection of messages by Message-Id
which could be used as a permalink. For example

http://archives.postgresql.org/by-id/20060718220947(dot)M957(at)ganymede(dot)hub(dot)org

or something like that.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joe Conway 2006-07-19 04:20:05 Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-07-19 03:32:34 Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features?