Subject: Archived-At message header

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:51:04 -0400

Hi,

What are the chances that, if we're going to fix the problem of
archive boundaries at month end, we can do it with
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5064.txt?  I just learned about this
header, and it sure seems like it'd be useful.

A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/

---

From: Magnus Hagander <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:56:56 +0200

> header, and it sure seems like it'd be useful.

Can't we do this already, since our archives can be accessed by messageid?

/Magnus

---

From: Alvaro Herrera <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:01:36 -0400

> header, and it sure seems like it'd be useful.

It would be neat, but I'm not sure it can be done, because the WWW
archives are handled very far away from where the message is
distributed.

Hmm, but 3.2 talks about using Message-Id for generating URLs that will
work permanently.  Interesting.  There's even software for managing it.

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

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:06:37 -0400

> Can't we do this already, since our archives can be accessed by messageid?

We do, approximately.  The cool trick about this is that it's a
_message_ header, so it actually comes with the message.  The RFC
includes a pointer to w3c code that will generate these headers on the
way by based on Message-ID, yes.  

I guess what I was thinking is that the threading-across-month issue
could be solved by using these headers as the basis for building the
thread back up.  Maybe it's a dumb idea, though.  (Nobody would accuse
me of never having dumb ideas in public.)

A

---

From: Alvaro Herrera <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:20:04 -0400

> me of never having dumb ideas in public.)

I've also thought about this in the past.  I don't think it's a dumb
idea -- perhaps it can be made to work.  I'm hesitant to continue to
build kluges on top of Mhonarc, though.  (I tried to get Abhijit
Menon-Sen interested in exploring the idea of using Archivopteryx to
drive our archives, but he seems to have even less time for
experimentation with such things than I do.)

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

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:01:34 -0400

> work permanently.  Interesting.  There's even software for managing it.

Yeah.  That's why I think it's a nifty idea.

A