From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Message-Id: <200608011911.k71JBQl12986@momjian.us>
Subject: Re: Mail archive indexes are broken, URLs too
In-Reply-To: <200607291539.k6TFd0B14602@momjian.us>
To: PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 15:11:26 -0400 (EDT)
CC: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"


Is anyone working on this?  Marc?  If not, who can make these
modifications to the archive numbering?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > When Marc fixed the message-boundary pattern and regenerated the
> > archives, many of the existing messages changed URLs because they
> > got assigned slightly different numbers.  I notice that the archive
> > search engine hasn't yet tracked this change --- if you do a search
> > and click on a link to a message, you'll arrive at a message close
> > to the one you want but probably not quite it.
> > 
> > Regenerating the archive indexes is presumably not hard, but there's
> > a bigger problem: for awhile now many of us have been in the habit
> > of citing old discussions by archive URLs.  All those links are now
> > broken too, and I can't think of any easy way to fix them.  And then
> > there's Google etc.
> > 
> > I wonder if it'd be better to revert the regeneration of the archives,
> > and only apply the new message-boundary pattern to future messages.
> 
> Agreed.  There have been no changes since we discussed this.
> 
> The best proposal was to renumber the newly-found items to the end of
> the numeric range for the pre-July 2006 archives, and to properly number
> July 2006 and later archives.  And this date range has to be enbedded in
> the archive script so if it is ever run again, this behavior continues
> to happen.
> 
> The longer we take to fix this, the more likely that people are creating
> URL's that refer to the existing pre-July 2006 numbering which should
> change.  It needs to be fixed quickly.
> 
> And we can't just leave it alone because old archive emails have URLs
> that point to now-incorrect numbers, and there is no good way to fix
> that everywhere are emails are archived.
> 
> -- 
>   Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
>   EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
> 
>   + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
> 
>                http://archives.postgresql.org

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +