Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches

Matteo Beccati wrote:
> Il 19/01/2010 09:44, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
> >As long as the templating is separated from the code, it doesn't
> >matter if it's a dedicated templating engine or PHP. The point being,
> >focus on the contents and interface, porting the actual
> >HTML-generation is likely to be easy compared to that.
>
> I've been following the various suggestions. Please take a look at
> the updated archives proof of concept:
>
> http://archives.beccati.org/

I like this.

Sorry for being unable to get in touch with you on IM. It's been a
hectic time here with only very few pauses.

Some things:

* the list of lists and groups of lists are stored in two JSON files.
Should I send you a copy of them so that you can tweak your code to use
them? They are generated automatically from the wwwmaster database.

* We have a bunch of templates that you could perhaps have used, if you
hadn't already written all of it ... :-(

* While I don't personally care, some are going to insist that the site
works with Javascript disabled. I didn't try but from your description
it doesn't seem like it would. Is this easily fixable?

* The old monthly interface /list/yyyy-mm/msg*php is not really
necessary to keep, *except* that we need the existing URLs to redirect
to the corresponding new message page. I think we should be able to
create a database of URL redirects from the old site, using the
Message-Id URL style. So each message accessed using the old URL style
would require two redirects, but I don't think this is a problem. Do
you agree?

* We're using Subversion to keep the current code. Is your code
version-controlled? We'd need to import your code there, I'm afraid.

> Last but not least, it's backwards compatibile with the
> /message-id/* URI. The other one (/list/yyyy-mm/msg*.php) is
> implemented, but I just realized that it has problems dealing with
> the old archive weirdness (2009-12 shows also some messages dated
> aug 2009 nov 2009 or jan 2010 for -hackers).

I'm surprised about the Aug 2009 ones, but the others are explained
because the site divides the mboxes using one timezone and the time
displayed is a different timezone. We don't really control the first
one so there's nothing to do about it; but anyway it's not really
important.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.