Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE01E632542
	for <pgsql-www-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:02:26 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 50149-06 for
	<pgsql-www-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:02:25 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05135632520
	for <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:02:20 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n3GH2Arp020483;
	Thu, 16 Apr 2009 13:02:10 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
cc: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>,
 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>,
	Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Archives policy 
In-reply-to: <20090416135324.U84471@hub.org> 
References: <16454.1239890476@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200904161454.n3GEsxm27869@momjian.us>
	<937d27e10904160808w21a2ebbcs57136807df000680@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090416151427.GW7709@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<937d27e10904160827r19c50f2fg79a552fdaae96836@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090416135324.U84471@hub.org>
Comments: In-reply-to "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
	message dated "Thu, 16 Apr 2009 13:54:15 -0300"
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 13:02:10 -0400
Message-ID: <20482.1239901330@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200904/82
X-Sequence-Number: 16949

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Dave Page wrote:
>> Yeah, thanks for raising that! If we catch inappropriate messages almost 
>> immediately, it should just be a case of stopping mhonarc from running 
>> and deleting the messages from the mbox file. If they've been there are 
>> while (and renumbering messages will be a problem)

> Isn't that why Alvaro(?) went through all that work getting it so that we 
> could reference messages by MessageID?  To remove the worry concerning 
> renumbering?

No, because all the internal links are still by message number, as are
uncountably many bookmarks and search engine entries that are outside
our control.  What Alvaro did is a convenience for some cases where you
have the message in your own mailbox and want to produce an archive
URL for it easily.

I agree that the correct way to handle such a situation is to replace
the message body with "Deleted by request of poster" or something
like that.

			regards, tom lane