[Mailman-Developers] Re: Dates

David Champion dgc@uchicago.edu
Tue, 1 May 2001 17:21:29 -0500

On 2001.05.01, in <20010501180454.13332@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us>,
	"Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
> If that date is *wrong*, it's *wrong*.  That it was applied by the
> sending MUA does *not* make it automatically authoritative; timestamps
> are an absolute -- there *is* a standard.

But it's not the MLM's business to judge whether a Date: header is
correct.  How would it possibly know?  You're discussing ways to make a
correct guess in most cases, but not a way to ensure correct
information in all cases.

> Fine.  Then turn those switches off.  You're in a minority, many other
> people hate having *incorrect* (and they are incorrect -- those messages

I don't think the discussion thus far is sufficient to say who's a
minority, and I don't think that's relevant.  What matters is that
Barry seems to agree with you, and that not one has proposed a way to
make everyone happy.

> people hate having *incorrect* (and they are incorrect -- those messages
> were *not* sent in 1982) archives.

Suppose I send a message on May 12, 2001, and my mail system goes down
before it gets out.  My mail system isn't back up for 10 days, but they
my message hits the list with its old, but correct, Date: header.  My
outbound mail was still sent on May 12, no matter that it's not within
7 days of May 12 anymore.

This approach to the hypothetical problem doesn't cover all cases, just
the majority of cases where there's damage due to misconfiguration.
Maybe that's good enough, maybe not; but I agree with Dan that varying
opinions and wishes may be pointed out.

 -D.	dgc@uchicago.edu	NSIT	University of Chicago