Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:14:00 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: jmb@freefall.freebsd.org (Jonathan M. Bresler) Cc: terry@lambert.org, jfieber@indiana.edu, langfod@dihelix.com, hasty@rah.star-gate.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Cool Web page interface to mail + search engine? Message-ID: <199703242014.NAA23311@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199703241959.LAA01517@freefall.freebsd.org> from "Jonathan M. Bresler" at Mar 24, 97 11:59:02 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Two elements in hypermail, threading and date sorting, are good > > > in principle but the overall implementation is clumsy and doesn't > > > scale well. The current interface to the FreeBSD mailing list > > > archives scales nicely, but is currently missing these features. > > > > We still don't message-ID stamp the messages on receipt by majordomo, > > do we? > > Terry, > what a are you proposing? every message has its own message-ID > providing by the orignating machine. please, clarify what > you have in mind. Well, we have exchanged private email on this, but I'll respond publically to this posting... No everyone uses sendmail. If you look at Robert Withrow's messages (as an example, not to pick on Robert) the "Message-ID:" is not present -- Robert is using EXMH, and he's not getting an ID stamp. I've seen the same thing on older SMTP servers (for instance, there are a number of machines behind firewalls that really don't need to do the "security update" process, and so are running with whatever version came from the vendor originally. What I'm suggesting is that there needs to be a "X-List-ID:" or something similar for mailing lists, _added by the list server_. We can be guaranteed that a reply to a message won't come to the list server before the message; even if we can't (CC: line has list in it instead of as the primary recipient), if you generate the message ID based on UTC timestamp and originator, you can still time-order thread messages witha given subject (and use "Re: " prefixing of the subject to get a full thread identity). The major problem is that mailers which don't use the message ID of the message being replied to in the generation of an "In-Response-To:" or similar header. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703242014.NAA23311>