From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3188 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2004 18:27:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3153 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2004 18:27:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jan 2004 18:27:00 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i0FIQug17507; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:26:56 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i0FIQtE21369; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:26:55 -0500 Received: from redhat.com (coe.boston.redhat.com [172.16.65.80]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0FIQtOL008789; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:26:55 -0500 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id A0E51400109; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:26:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:27:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Ian Lance Taylor Cc: overseers@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Archive bug-binutils? Message-ID: <20040115182655.GC16598@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ian Lance Taylor , overseers@sourceware.org References: <20040115181709.GA16598@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-q1/txt/msg00033.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 01:20:41PM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >Christopher Faylor writes: > >> On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 12:54:56PM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> >I could probably figure this out, but maybe somebody knows the answer >> >off the top of their head. The bug-binutils@gnu.org mailing list is >> >now working properly--we have activated spam blocking, and are using >> >moderators to eliminate the remaining spam. I would like to reactive >> >the archive which is accessible from sourceware.org (it currently says >> >that there were no messages from January to March, which I know is >> >untrue). How should I do this? >> >> Why do you want to do this? AFAIK, bug-binutils is already archived >> at gnu.org. Why duplicate the archive? I've never understood why >> we are archiving mail from other mailing lists on sourceware.org. >> If it is crucial that we access the archive from sourceware.org, >> couldn't we just set up a link? > >Hmmm, I was thinking that it would be nice to have the same archive >format as all the other sourceware lists. But perhaps you are right. >I'll just put a link to the bug-binutils archive from the binutils web >page. In a perfect world, I'm sure this would be useful. But I'm noting that all of the disks on sourceware are filling up at a truly alarming rate -- much faster than I'd anticipated when I first speced out the new system (not that I had much $$$ leeway to buy more disks anyway, but...) so any additional disk usage burden should be scrutinized. I meant to mention this in my original message. I think I am soon going to take the drastic measure of eliminating some of the ezmlm archive data. Does anyone have a serious problem with that? This would mean that you can't send email to ezmlm requesting the email messages from four years ago. I don't think this is a popular feature but it's hard to know for sure. cgf