From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Dec 22 16:43:44 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id QAA29457 for chat-outgoing; Sun, 22 Dec 1996 16:43:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id QAA29452 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 1996 16:43:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by root.com (8.7.6/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA23169; Sun, 22 Dec 1996 16:42:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199612230042.QAA23169@root.com> X-Authentication-Warning: implode.root.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: "Jonathan M. Bresler" cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, marcs@znep.com, jfieber@indiana.edu, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mailing list archives In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 22 Dec 1996 06:10:09 PST." <199612221410.GAA03899@freefall.freebsd.org> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 16:42:35 -0800 Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >David Greenman wrote: >> >> >> Marc Slemko wrote: >> >> > >> >> > And still speaking of archives, where can the raw archives be ftped from? >> >> >> >> freefall.freebsd.org >> >> /home/mail/archive/ >> > >> >Not as anonymous ftp.. :-) We should probably get them back online >> >soon. I think there's more than enough disk space on wcarchive; about >> >175MB since I just house-cleaned the SNAP (which is superceded by >> >2.2-ALPHA) and 2.1.5-RELEASE trees. I wonder what the best way of >> >getting them across is going to be though... rsync? >> >> I sure hate the ONE-BIG-FILE archive format. I find it almost entirely >> useless. If we were to change it to a one-per-file scheme, it wouldn't be >> such a big effort to keep the stuff in sync (hint: I very much dislike >> copying several giant multi-megabyte files over to wcarchive continuously). > > how about: > > we switch from the one-big file format to monthly files > named freebsd-questions-199611, for example > each month a new file is started for each list This isn't any improvement, IMO. The files would still be way-too-large for people to deal with and it doesn't make it any easier to index the contents. One message per file is the only scheme that addresses these problems. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project