Two naive questions

Two naive questions

[Fergus Daly]

I've been reading/writing to this list since 2001 or maybe earlier and have only just Subscribe'd. Mainly because I have been aware when contributing to a thread I have always broken it by not using Follow-up properly, just artificially including the title prefix Re: in what is essentially a new post. Having Subscribe'd, I'm no clearer how to do this properly.
1. Please can somebody point me to an instruction?
2. Since when the new look provided by
https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/ ?
Is there a way to default to the "legacy" look provided at, say,
https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/cygwin/2019-04/ 
but not obviously available today (even by changing 2019 to 2020 in the line above)?
(I've looked for what I had assumed would be a long conversation on this change, but cannot find anything.)
Thanks.

Re: Two naive questions

[Marco Atzeri]

Am 16.04.2020 um 22:21 schrieb Fergus Daly via Cygwin:
> I've been reading/writing to this list since 2001 or maybe earlier and have only just Subscribe'd. Mainly because I have been aware when contributing to a thread I have always broken it by not using Follow-up properly, just artificially including the title prefix Re: in what is essentially a new post. Having Subscribe'd, I'm no clearer how to do this properly.
> 1. Please can somebody point me to an instruction?

usually it is just reply to the list on your mail program.



> 2. Since when the new look provided by
> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/ ?

new server for sourceware.org with new software in March
https://sourceware.org/sourceware-wiki/MigrationStatus/

Cygwin is a guest on it, we are not the maintainers.

> Is there a way to default to the "legacy" look provided at, say,
> https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/cygwin/2019-04/
> but not obviously available today (even by changing 2019 to 2020 in the line above)?
> (I've looked for what I had assumed would be a long conversation on this change, but cannot find anything.)
> Thanks.
> 
Regards
Marco

RE: Two naive questions

[Fergus Daly]

>> usually it is just reply to the list on your mail program.
Yeah, I now see how it all works. Thank you.
>> Cygwin is a guest on it, we are not the maintainers.
Understood. Thank you.
Fergus

-----Original Message-----
From: Cygwin [mailto:cygwin-bounces@cygwin.com] On Behalf Of Marco Atzeri via Cygwin
Sent: 17 April 2020 06:11
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Two naive questions

Am 16.04.2020 um 22:21 schrieb Fergus Daly via Cygwin:
> I've been reading/writing to this list since 2001 or maybe earlier and have only just Subscribe'd. Mainly because I have been aware when contributing to a thread I have always broken it by not using Follow-up properly, just artificially including the title prefix Re: in what is essentially a new post. Having Subscribe'd, I'm no clearer how to do this properly.
> 1. Please can somebody point me to an instruction?

usually it is just reply to the list on your mail program.



> 2. Since when the new look provided by
> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/ ?

new server for sourceware.org with new software in March
https://sourceware.org/sourceware-wiki/MigrationStatus/

Cygwin is a guest on it, we are not the maintainers.

> Is there a way to default to the "legacy" look provided at, say,
> https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/cygwin/2019-04/
> but not obviously available today (even by changing 2019 to 2020 in the line above)?
> (I've looked for what I had assumed would be a long conversation on this change, but cannot find anything.)
> Thanks.
> 
Regards
Marco
--
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Re: Two naive questions

[Brian Inglis]

On 2020-04-17 05:17, Fergus Daly via Cygwin wrote:
>>> usually it is just reply to the list on your mail program.
> Yeah, I now see how it all works. Thank you.

When Reply List doesn't work, pick Reply All and trim the To and Reply To
addresses to just the list address, and maybe a CC to what may be a
non-subscriber if you don't recognize them.

>>> Cygwin is a guest on it, we are not the maintainers.
> Understood. Thank you.

> On 17 April 2020 06:11, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> Am 16.04.2020 um 22:21 schrieb Fergus Daly via Cygwin:
>> I've been reading/writing to this list since 2001 or maybe earlier and
>> have only just Subscribe'd. Mainly because I have been aware when 
>> contributing to a thread I have always broken it by not using Follow-up 
>> properly, just artificially including the title prefix Re: in what is
>> essentially a new post.
>> Having Subscribe'd, I'm no clearer how to do this properly.
>> 1. Please can somebody point me to an instruction?
> usually it is just reply to the list on your mail program.
>> 2. Since when the new look provided by
>> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/ ?
> new server for sourceware.org with new software in March
> https://sourceware.org/sourceware-wiki/MigrationStatus/
> Cygwin is a guest on it, we are not the maintainers.
>> Is there a way to default to the "legacy" look provided at, say,
>> https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/cygwin/2019-04/
>> but not obviously available today (even by changing 2019 to 2020 in the
>> line above)?
>> (I've looked for what I had assumed would be a long conversation on this 
>> change, but cannot find anything.)

Infrastructure issues are dealt with on:

	https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/overseers

and the move/migration was dealt with under:

	https://sourceware.org/pipermail/overseers/2020q1/thread.html
	(#start and #end anchors go to oldest and newest posts)

starting:

	https://sourceware.org/pipermail/overseers/2020q1/016620.html

You can find mentions of overseers in some sourceware pages.

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.

Re: Two naive questions

[Stephen Carrier]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 07:10:51AM +0200, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin wrote:
> Am 16.04.2020 um 22:21 schrieb Fergus Daly via Cygwin:
> > I've been reading/writing to this list since 2001 or maybe earlier and have only just Subscribe'd. Mainly because I have been aware when contributing to a thread I have always broken it by not using Follow-up properly, just artificially including the title prefix Re: in what is essentially a new post. Having Subscribe'd, I'm no clearer how to do this properly.
> > 1. Please can somebody point me to an instruction?
> 
> usually it is just reply to the list on your mail program.

And edit the subject line as well.  There is a mail header "In-Reply-To"
that should be blanked as well to avoid misleading any mechanism that
makes use of it.

I remember having had the same confusion the first few times I initiated
threads.

Stephen

Re: Two naive questions

[Andrey Repin]

Greetings, Stephen Carrier!

> I remember having had the same confusion the first few times I initiated
> threads.

When you start a new thread, do not reply to existing threads.
It's that simple.


-- 
With best regards,
Andrey Repin
Friday, April 17, 2020 21:15:44

Sorry for my terrible english...

Re: Two naive questions

[Brian Inglis]

On 2020-04-17 12:16, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Greetings, Stephen Carrier!
>> I remember having had the same confusion the first few times I initiated
>> threads.

> When you start a new thread, do not reply to existing threads.
> It's that simple.

Indeed - proper mail and news readers use References not Subject headers for
threading when available, so your new topic will be lost under an old thread.

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.

Re: Two naive questions

[Stephen Carrier]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:44:30PM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2020-04-17 12:16, Andrey Repin wrote:
> > Greetings, Stephen Carrier!
> >> I remember having had the same confusion the first few times I initiated
> >> threads.
> 
> > When you start a new thread, do not reply to existing threads.
> > It's that simple.
> 
> Indeed - proper mail and news readers use References not Subject headers for
> threading when available, so your new topic will be lost under an old thread.

I think the OP's first question was asking how to effectively join
an existing thread when one is browsing the recent archives and not
subscribed to the list.

Joining the list after seeing a question one would like to answer
doesn't help, because the message you would like to respond to has
already gone by.

I think a good solution would be to get the message number from the web
archive and request that a particular message be sent to you.  Then you
could respond to that message and join the thread properly.

However, there doesn't seem to be a way to do that.  I used to be notified
how to retrieve messages I had missed (due to bouncing) but the method
did not work.  Furthermore, the mailman faq doesn't mention any way to
do this.

Stephen

Re: Two naive questions

[Bill Stewart]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:20 AM Stephen Carrier wrote:

> I think the OP's first question was asking how to effectively join
> an existing thread when one is browsing the recent archives and not
> subscribed to the list.
>
> Joining the list after seeing a question one would like to answer
> doesn't help, because the message you would like to respond to has
> already gone by.
>
> I think a good solution would be to get the message number from the web
> archive and request that a particular message be sent to you.  Then you
> could respond to that message and join the thread properly.
>
> However, there doesn't seem to be a way to do that.  I used to be notified
> how to retrieve messages I had missed (due to bouncing) but the method
> did not work.  Furthermore, the mailman faq doesn't mention any way to
> do this.

I would say that this is a side-effect of using a mailing list when
what's really being asked for is a discussion forum.

A mailing list is convenient for self-subscription and replies, but
replying to a past message (one that's "already gone by" as stated
above) is not really possible (that I know of?). Starting a new
message to the list with an identical subject to an existing thread
doesn't reply to the existing thread but rather starts a new thread
with an identical subject (since the thread ID is different).

What I could suggest for this case is to start a new message and
provide a link to a web-based copy of the message that you're replying
to - this at least provides context, even though it starts a new
thread. (This, of course, depends on a web-based archive of past
messages.)

This exact problem is one of the main reasons why many organizations
prefer a web-based forum rather than a mailing list. (NNTP is a
possibility, but many [most?] organizations block NNTP access for
content management and security reasons.) One of the other main
reasons a web-based forum is preferable is that participants don't
have to store/delete irrelevant messages.

Bill

Re: Two naive questions

[Eliot Moss]

On 4/20/2020 1:41 PM, Bill Stewart wrote:

> This exact problem is one of the main reasons why many organizations
> prefer a web-based forum rather than a mailing list. (NNTP is a
> possibility, but many [most?] organizations block NNTP access for
> content management and security reasons.) One of the other main
> reasons a web-based forum is preferable is that participants don't
> have to store/delete irrelevant messages.

Definitely not intending to start a controversy, but maybe cygwin
could switch to a bug tracker sort of system for dealing with issues
and questions ...

Regards - Eliot

Re: Two naive questions

[Bill Stewart]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 12:11 PM Eliot Moss wrote:

> On 4/20/2020 1:41 PM, Bill Stewart wrote:
>
> > This exact problem is one of the main reasons why many organizations
> > prefer a web-based forum rather than a mailing list. (NNTP is a
> > possibility, but many [most?] organizations block NNTP access for
> > content management and security reasons.) One of the other main
> > reasons a web-based forum is preferable is that participants don't
> > have to store/delete irrelevant messages.
>
> Definitely not intending to start a controversy, but maybe cygwin
> could switch to a bug tracker sort of system for dealing with issues
> and questions ...

My intent wasn't to start a controversy either...just pointing out
some limitations of mailing lists.

The aforementioned points are the main reasons why I agree with you
that a web-based solution would be better for questions and support.

Bill

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:41:32AM -0600, Bill Stewart wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:20 AM Stephen Carrier wrote:
>>I think the OP's first question was asking how to effectively join an
>>existing thread when one is browsing the recent archives and not
>>subscribed to the list.
>>
>>Joining the list after seeing a question one would like to answer
>>doesn't help, because the message you would like to respond to has
>>already gone by.
>>
>>I think a good solution would be to get the message number from the web
>>archive and request that a particular message be sent to you.  Then you
>>could respond to that message and join the thread properly.
>>
>>However, there doesn't seem to be a way to do that.  I used to be
>>notified how to retrieve messages I had missed (due to bouncing) but
>>the method did not work.  Furthermore, the mailman faq doesn't mention
>>any way to do this.
>
>I would say that this is a side-effect of using a mailing list when
>what's really being asked for is a discussion forum.
>
>A mailing list is convenient for self-subscription and replies, but
>replying to a past message (one that's "already gone by" as stated
>above) is not really possible (that I know of?).  Starting a new
>message to the list with an identical subject to an existing thread
>doesn't reply to the existing thread but rather starts a new thread
>with an identical subject (since the thread ID is different).

With mailman, if you click on a message in the archives and then click
on the email address at the top, your mail client of choice will be
opened with correct "In-Reply-To" set.  If you want to reply to the list
then replace the "To" with the email address of the mailing list.  You
can also download the mailbox-formatted archive, read it with a client
like "mutt" and reply that way.

OTOH, most message boards have a way to freeze old discussions and
discourage resurrecting dead threads.  The archives obviously don't
allow that so you might want to consider if your resurrection of an old
discussion would really be appreciated.  If the discussion is old it's
probably best to start a new thread and maybe include a link to the
archive.

But, really, if you want to be part of an active discussion then join
the mailing list.

Re: Two naive questions

[Bill Stewart]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 2:09 PM Christopher Faylor wrote:

> With mailman, if you click on a message in the archives and then click
> on the email address at the top, your mail client of choice will be
> opened with correct "In-Reply-To" set.  If you want to reply to the list
> then replace the "To" with the email address of the mailing list.  You
> can also download the mailbox-formatted archive, read it with a client
> like "mutt" and reply that way.

So it is _possible_, but not exactly user-friendly (you're presuming
that end-users even understand these instructions). What if a user is
limited to a web-based mail client, for example, and has no way to
access said options? (I think it goes without saying that a "use a
better mail client" response is not feasible, at least for some users,
in addition to possibly sounding a bit elitist.)

Aside from this, in my opinion, the above instructions are an awkward
(IMO) workaround due to limitations inherent in trying to use email
for something it wasn't really designed for (again: just my opinion).

> OTOH, most message boards have a way to freeze old discussions and
> discourage resurrecting dead threads.

That depends on who administers the forum. That's not necessarily an
inviolable rule.

Again - not trying to start a controversy here - just pointing out
that a mailing list has some limitations. (After all, web-based
discussion forums were invented for a reason.)

Bill

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 02:44:41PM -0600, Bill Stewart wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 2:09 PM Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>With mailman, if you click on a message in the archives and then click
>>on the email address at the top, your mail client of choice will be
>>opened with correct "In-Reply-To" set.  If you want to reply to the
>>list then replace the "To" with the email address of the mailing list.
>>You can also download the mailbox-formatted archive, read it with a
>>client like "mutt" and reply that way.
>
>So it is _possible_, but not exactly user-friendly (you're presuming
>that end-users even understand these instructions).  What if a user is
>limited to a web-based mail client, for example, and has no way to
>access said options?  (I think it goes without saying that a "use a
>better mail client" response is not feasible, at least for some users,
>in addition to possibly sounding a bit elitist.)

So, there's a potential email client out there which doesn't allow
you to change the To address.  Sounds pretty limiting but I guess
it's not too surprising.

Anyway, I was just instructing in how this could be done, in case
someone who knew what they were doing was interested.  I wasn't saying
"WRONG! Mailman is awesome as a message board!"

Re: Two naive questions

[Stephen Carrier]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 04:09:21PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> With mailman, if you click on a message in the archives and then click
> on the email address at the top, your mail client of choice will be
> opened with correct "In-Reply-To" set.  If you want to reply to the list
> then replace the "To" with the email address of the mailing list.  You
> can also download the mailbox-formatted archive, read it with a client
> like "mutt" and reply that way.

Thank you, these are interesting and useful suggestions.

Stephen

Re: Two naive questions

[Andrey Repin]

Greetings, Bill Stewart!

> A mailing list is convenient for self-subscription and replies, but
> replying to a past message (one that's "already gone by" as stated
> above) is not really possible (that I know of?).

You can ask list management software to resend past messages.
I don't recall specifics, and given the recent change, they may be entirely
obsolete.
You can check https://www.list.org/ for directions.


-- 
With best regards,
Andrey Repin
Wednesday, April 22, 2020 12:52:17

Sorry for my terrible english...

Re: Two naive questions

[Stephen Carrier]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:57:50PM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
> You can ask list management software to resend past messages.
> I don't recall specifics, and given the recent change, they may be entirely
> obsolete.
> You can check https://www.list.org/ for directions.

Glendower: I can call the spirits from the vasty deep.

Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come, when you do call for them?

As I commented upthread (Monday) I have seen instructions on how to
recall messages.  I tried them, and they did not work.  I tried again
more recently, and the instructions did not work, and I received
bounce messages to the effect that the request was not understood.
I also commented above that I had looked at the mailman documentation
for which you provide a link, and did not find any method described for
recalling messages.

If you think I am mistaken, please find the information on how to do this
and provide a specific link.  Providing a link to the main documentation
page and suggesting that others go looking is to send them on a wild-goose
chase aka waste of time.

It would be a useful feature, I agree, and if I simply failed to find
what I was looking for, I would welcome correction.

Stephen

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:49:34AM -0700, Stephen Carrier wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:57:50PM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
>>You can ask list management software to resend past messages.  I don't
>>recall specifics, and given the recent change, they may be entirely
>>obsolete.  You can check https://www.list.org/ for directions.
>
>As I commented upthread (Monday) I have seen instructions on how to
>recall messages.  I tried them, and they did not work.  I tried again
>more recently, and the instructions did not work, and I received bounce
>messages to the effect that the request was not understood.  I also
>commented above that I had looked at the mailman documentation for
>which you provide a link, and did not find any method described for
>recalling messages.

Apparently you're not reading the whole cygwin mailing list thread on this
subject:

https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/thread.html

To reiterate, cygwin.com's hosting site "sourceware.org" went through a
hardware and software change in March.  If you're attempting to use
instructions from before the move to new hardware and different mailing
list software then they won't work.

>If you think I am mistaken, please find the information on how to do this
>and provide a specific link.  Providing a link to the main documentation
>page and suggesting that others go looking is to send them on a wild-goose
>chase aka waste of time.
>
>It would be a useful feature, I agree, and if I simply failed to find
>what I was looking for, I would welcome correction.

Information provided information here:

https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/244545.html
https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/244546.html

To summarize: You can click on the mailto link of any message in the
archive and it will invoke your email client with the proper In-Reply-To
set.  That will allow you to reply to the sender of the message and
maintain proper threading.  If you want to send to the list, replace the
"To" with the email address of the list.

I am aware that some people may find this incredibly daunting but that's
what's available given the software that we're using.  Read the thread
for why we're using the mailman2 software.

You can download the archive by going to, e.g.,

https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/

and clicking on the "Downloadable version" for the time period that
you need.  It will be a gzipped mbox-formatted text archive.

If none of this meets your needs then maybe some of the other sites
that archive the cygwin list will have something more to your liking.

cgf

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 03:13:12PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>Information provided information here:

Or, even just "Information provided here:"

Re: Two naive questions

[Stephen Carrier]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 03:13:12PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:49:34AM -0700, Stephen Carrier wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:57:50PM +0300, Andrey Repin wrote:
> >>You can ask list management software to resend past messages.  I don't
> >>recall specifics, and given the recent change, they may be entirely
> >>obsolete.  You can check https://www.list.org/ for directions.
> >
> >As I commented upthread (Monday) I have seen instructions on how to
> >recall messages.  I tried them, and they did not work.  I tried again
> >more recently, and the instructions did not work, and I received bounce
> >messages to the effect that the request was not understood.  I also
> >commented above that I had looked at the mailman documentation for
> >which you provide a link, and did not find any method described for
> >recalling messages.
> 
> Apparently you're not reading the whole cygwin mailing list thread on this
> subject:
> 
> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/thread.html

I have been following the whole thread, and my comments were in the
context of the whole thread.  The subject I was addressing was whether
either the current or previous versions of the list supported retrieval
of old messages.  Neither the previous or current incarnations of the
list do this, according to me, but what do I know?

> To reiterate, cygwin.com's hosting site "sourceware.org" went through a
> hardware and software change in March.  If you're attempting to use
> instructions from before the move to new hardware and different mailing
> list software then they won't work.

Yes, I had heard.

I was not complaining, just reporting results of an investigation to
save others the trouble of doing it for themselves.

> >If you think I am mistaken, please find the information on how to do this
> >and provide a specific link.  Providing a link to the main documentation
> >page and suggesting that others go looking is to send them on a wild-goose
> >chase aka waste of time.
> >
> >It would be a useful feature, I agree, and if I simply failed to find
> >what I was looking for, I would welcome correction.
> 
> Information provided information here:
> 
> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/244545.html
> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/244546.html

Yes, I appreciated your contribution, but that wasn't the subject
under discussion, which was retrieving messages via the mail list.
I was replying to someone else.

> To summarize: You can click on the mailto link of any message in the
> archive and it will invoke your email client with the proper In-Reply-To
> set.  That will allow you to reply to the sender of the message and
> maintain proper threading.  If you want to send to the list, replace the
> "To" with the email address of the list.

Yes!  In this message:

https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/244568.html 

I said that your suggestion was a good one.  Maybe you missed it?
That's when I was replying to you!

> I am aware that some people may find this incredibly daunting but that's
> what's available given the software that we're using.  Read the thread
> for why we're using the mailman2 software.

Yeah, I haven't been complaining or advocated that we use anything
different. 

[ additional proposed solutions that are perfectly good, snipped. ]

> If none of this meets your needs then maybe some of the other sites
> that archive the cygwin list will have something more to your liking.

If you don't mind, I'll continue to participate in the list, which I
like very much the way it is.  Have you confused me with someone else?

> cgf

Stephen

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 11:58:26AM -0700, Stephen Carrier wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 03:13:12PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> To summarize: You can click on the mailto link of any message in the
>> archive and it will invoke your email client with the proper In-Reply-To
>> set.  That will allow you to reply to the sender of the message and
>> maintain proper threading.  If you want to send to the list, replace the
>> "To" with the email address of the list.
>
>Yes!  In this message:
>
>https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2020-April/244568.html 
>
>I said that your suggestion was a good one.  Maybe you missed it?
>That's when I was replying to you!

Ah, many apologies for not following my own advice.  I'm sorry to have
made you spend time responding to my own confusion.

Just to be definitive: The old mailing list software *did* allow
retrieving old messages via email the new one does not.

>>If none of this meets your needs then maybe some of the other sites
>>that archive the cygwin list will have something more to your liking.
>
>If you don't mind, I'll continue to participate in the list, which I
>like very much the way it is.  Have you confused me with someone else?

I was not in any way suggesting that you go elsewhere to discuss things.
I was just pointing out that cygwin.com is not the only place that
*archives* email and was suggesting that possibly one of the other sites
out there might offer what you're looking for.  It's probably unlikely
but I thought I'd mention it.

https://marc.info/?q=about
http://gmane.io/

cgf

Re: Two naive questions

[Brian Inglis]

On 2020-04-20 11:20, Stephen Carrier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:44:30PM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> On 2020-04-17 12:16, Andrey Repin wrote:
>>> Greetings, Stephen Carrier!
>>>> I remember having had the same confusion the first few times I initiated
>>>> threads.
>>
>>> When you start a new thread, do not reply to existing threads.
>>> It's that simple.
>>
>> Indeed - proper mail and news readers use References not Subject headers for
>> threading when available, so your new topic will be lost under an old thread.
> 
> I think the OP's first question was asking how to effectively join
> an existing thread when one is browsing the recent archives and not
> subscribed to the list.

As the next response and his reply make clear, he was asking about preperly
replying after subscribing.

> Joining the list after seeing a question one would like to answer
> doesn't help, because the message you would like to respond to has
> already gone by.
> 
> I think a good solution would be to get the message number from the web
> archive and request that a particular message be sent to you.  Then you
> could respond to that message and join the thread properly.
> 
> However, there doesn't seem to be a way to do that.  I used to be notified
> how to retrieve messages I had missed (due to bouncing) but the method
> did not work.  Furthermore, the mailman faq doesn't mention any way to
> do this.

The new server ml archive does not seem to offer the metadata available on the
previous server and archive, and that is true of most archives that do not allow
replies: probably a good way to reduce space required by 50-90%, from what I can
see.
A subscribed user could provide you with the reply References header values.

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:59:08AM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote:
>The new server ml archive does not seem to offer the metadata available on the
>previous server and archive, and that is true of most archives that do not allow
>replies: probably a good way to reduce space required by 50-90%, from what I can
>see.
>A subscribed user could provide you with the reply References header values.

This is a text cut and paste from https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/

    The Cygwin Archives

    You can get more information about this list.
    Archive 	View by: 	Downloadable version
    April 2020: 	[ Thread ] [ Subject ] [ Author ] [ Date ] 	[ Gzip'd Text 110 KB ]

Notice the "Gzip'd Text ..."?

That's the mbox formatted email archives.

Re: Two naive questions

[Brian Inglis]

On 2020-04-20 14:14, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:59:08AM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> The new server ml archive does not seem to offer the metadata available on the
>> previous server and archive, and that is true of most archives that do not allow
>> replies: probably a good way to reduce space required by 50-90%, from what I can
>> see.
>> A subscribed user could provide you with the reply References header values.
> This is a text cut and paste from https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/
>     The Cygwin Archives
>     You can get more information about this list.
>     Archive 	View by: 	Downloadable version
>     April 2020: 	[ Thread ] [ Subject ] [ Author ] [ Date ] 	[ Gzip'd Text 110 KB ]
> Notice the "Gzip'd Text ..."?
> That's the mbox formatted email archives.

I imported them all into Thunderbird to be able to search locally, as all
archive search tools seem to be worse than any of the search sites in
determining relevance or providing *all* relevant results newest first, while
the builtin tools allow searching on header field combos, and there is always
grep/sed/awk thru the mozmsgs maildirs for the really fuzzy searches.

Your previous reply was probably the best that can be done with pipermail
archives on mailman 2.1, although I am surprised you did not go to mailman 3
with hyperkitty on the new servers.

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.

Mailing list musings (was Re: Two naive questions)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:33:59PM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote:
>On 2020-04-20 14:14, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:59:08AM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote:
>>> The new server ml archive does not seem to offer the metadata available on the
>>> previous server and archive, and that is true of most archives that do not allow
>>> replies: probably a good way to reduce space required by 50-90%, from what I can
>>> see.
>>> A subscribed user could provide you with the reply References header values.
>> This is a text cut and paste from https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/
>>     The Cygwin Archives
>>     You can get more information about this list.
>>     Archive 	View by: 	Downloadable version
>>     April 2020: 	[ Thread ] [ Subject ] [ Author ] [ Date ] 	[ Gzip'd Text 110 KB ]
>> Notice the "Gzip'd Text ..."?
>> That's the mbox formatted email archives.
>
>I imported them all into Thunderbird to be able to search locally, as all
>archive search tools seem to be worse than any of the search sites in
>determining relevance or providing *all* relevant results newest first, while
>the builtin tools allow searching on header field combos, and there is always
>grep/sed/awk thru the mozmsgs maildirs for the really fuzzy searches.
>
>Your previous reply was probably the best that can be done with pipermail
>archives on mailman 2.1, although I am surprised you did not go to mailman 3
>with hyperkitty on the new servers.

Only mailman2 is available right now.

% dnf list 'mailman*'
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:49 ago on Tue 21 Apr 2020 08:10:25 PM GMT.
Installed Packages
mailman.x86_64             3:2.1.29-4.module_el8.0.0+34+0459d3d0  @AppStream
Available Packages
mailman-debuginfo.x86_64   3:2.1.29-4.module_el8.0.0+34+0459d3d0  base-debuginfo
mailman-debugsource.x86_64 3:2.1.29-4.module_el8.0.0+34+0459d3d0  base-debuginfo

As I said in a previous reply:

On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 10:58:31PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>There have been a few threads with people complaining about the change
>in some of the other sourceware lists but we're using the officially
>supported solution for maintaining a mailing list on RHEL and that is
>not going to change.

The overseers discussed a couple of other alternatives to mailman2 +
postfix like inbox and exim but, in the end, chose to stick with what
was supported and most common.  This is to avoid a situation from old
sourceware incarnations where we limped along for twenty years using the
barely supported/unsupported qmail+ezmlm combo (along with their
companion replacement for bind).

qmail and ezmlm were both amazing pieces of software but they were
showing their age in the era of DMARC, DKIM, and SPF.

Anyway, if another mailing list package becomes available then we'll
look at it but we are letting things settle down after the major move of
sourceware to new hardware and software.

Re: Two naive questions

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 08:21:56PM +0000, Fergus Daly wrote:
>2. Since when the new look provided by
>https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/ ?
>Is there a way to default to the "legacy" look provided at, say,
>https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/cygwin/2019-04/ 
>but not obviously available today (even by changing 2019 to 2020 in the
>line above)?  (I've looked for what I had assumed would be a long
>conversation on this change, but cannot find anything.)

sourceware is now using an the mailman mailling list software which is
what you see expressed in the "pipermail" link above.

There have been a few threads with people complaining about the change
in some of the other sourceware lists but we're using the officially
supported solution for maintaining a mailing list on RHEL and that is
not going to change.

So, no, there is no way to go back to the previous behavior.

cgf (sourceware administrator)