Re: archive links broken?

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:

> Magnus,
>
> * Magnus Hagander (magnus(at)hagander(dot)net) wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> > > On 04/03/2017 09:43 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
> > >> <mailto:jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh3
> > >> 3paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
> > >> <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh
> > >> 33paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de>
> > >>
> > >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3m
> > >> bno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
> > >> <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3
> > >> mbno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Yes, those links are clearly incorrect.
> > >>
> > >> The part that you're not telling us is where you found them...
> > >>
> > >
> > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170402225015.
> GC10244(at)fetter(dot)org
> >
> > I only see a single link like that in there,
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/63201ef9-26fb-
> 3f1f-664d-98531678cebc(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com,
> > and it works fine.
> >
> > The links you've listed above don't appear there AFAICT? (searching for
> > /message-id/)
>
> There's a few that point to postgr.es:
>
> Under 'Suppress implicit-conversion warnings seen':
>
> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170220141239(dot)GD12278(at)
> e733(dot)localdomain
> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2839(dot)1490714708(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)
> pa(dot)us
>
> Do we have some hack to avoid screwing up links for
> postgresql.org/message-id that needs to be updated to also look at
> postgr.es/m/ links..?
>

Ah yes, that's it. Right now it's loking for /message-id/<looks like an
email address>. I guess we need to expand that to also handle the /m/ links.

Should we do it for basically /(m|message-id/(xxxx), or do oyu think we
need to actually limit it by the domain name as well? (We don't limit the
postgresql.org one, but /message-id/ might be more unusual?)

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/