From cs5070214 at cse.iitd.ac.in Tue May 31 16:03:20 2011 From: cs5070214 at cse.iitd.ac.in (Dushyant Bansal) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 19:33:20 +0530 Subject: [mmgsoc] Pipermail archive UI Message-ID: <4DE4F528.6070200@cse.iitd.ac.in> Hi, So far, I have been able to run the basic functionalities of archive-ui for mm3. Moving forward, I would like to discuss these issues. Please give your feedback. *archive-ui* -> Yian's work on archive-ui as part of last year's GSOC on mailman 2.1 *pipermail* -> Pipermail on mailman 3 1. In pipermail, all the static htmls generated for each message(that goes into archives) are arranged in directories corresponding to different months. Whereas in archive-ui, all the conversations are stored in a single directory. The reason is that since a conversation can span across months, it is somewhat ambiguous where to keep that conversation. If any of you think that arranging conversations by months offers advantage in any form, then I can do so. But in that case, the whole conversation will be kept in the month when its first message arrives. 2. Readable urls: URL corresponding to a conversation can be created from subject of the first message of a conversation (in the same way as various blog sites do). Also, in archive-ui, when a message is archived, all the conversations are generated again. Ideally, we should do minimum amount of work on archiving a message. I am trying to work this out too. Thanks, Dushyant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cs5070214 at cse.iitd.ac.in Tue May 31 16:02:57 2011 From: cs5070214 at cse.iitd.ac.in (Dushyant Bansal) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 19:32:57 +0530 Subject: [mmgsoc] Pipermail archive UI Message-ID: <4DE4F511.8080301@cse.iitd.ac.in> Hi, So far, I have been able to run the basic functionalities of archive-ui for mm3. Moving forward, I would like to discuss these issues. Please give your feedback. *archive-ui* -> Yian's work on archive-ui as part of last year's GSOC on mailman 2.1 *pipermail* -> Pipermail on mailman 3 1. In pipermail, all the static htmls generated for each message(that goes into archives) are arranged in directories corresponding to different months. Whereas in archive-ui, all the conversations are stored in a single directory. The reason is that since a conversation can span across months, it is somewhat ambiguous where to keep that conversation. If any of you think that arranging conversations by months offers advantage in any form, then I can do so. But in that case, the whole conversation will be kept in the month when its first message arrives. 2. Readable urls: URL corresponding to a conversation can be created from subject of the first message of a conversation (in the same way as various blog sites do). Also, in archive-ui, when a message is archived, all the conversations are generated again. Ideally, we should do minimum amount of work on archiving a message. I am trying to work this out too. Thanks, Dushyant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From barry at list.org Tue May 31 16:34:25 2011 From: barry at list.org (Barry Warsaw) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:34:25 -0400 Subject: [mmgsoc] Pipermail archive UI In-Reply-To: <4DE4F511.8080301@cse.iitd.ac.in> References: <4DE4F511.8080301@cse.iitd.ac.in> Message-ID: <20110531103425.6664e7f2@neurotica.wooz.org> On May 31, 2011, at 07:32 PM, Dushyant Bansal wrote: >So far, I have been able to run the basic functionalities of archive-ui for >mm3. Moving forward, I would like to discuss these issues. Please give your >feedback. Fantastic! >*archive-ui* -> Yian's work on archive-ui as part of last year's GSOC on mailman 2.1 >*pipermail* -> Pipermail on mailman 3 > >1. In pipermail, all the static htmls generated for each message(that goes >into archives) are arranged in directories corresponding to different months. > Whereas in archive-ui, all the conversations are stored in a single > directory. The reason is that since a conversation can span across months, > it is somewhat ambiguous where to keep that conversation. No, in fact just about everybody finds Pipermail's forced divisions pretty crappy exactly for the reason you state. Now, there is some benefit to not just storing all the html in one big directory though. Some systems have limits on the number of files that can appear in one directory. These can be hard limits or practical (i.e. performance) limits. One thing that some people have done is to hash the contents and use that in the filename, with a hierarchy to represent the message, e.g.: for message foo - hash = 1234abcd - save the file in: - .../archives/private/foo/12/34/1234abcd.html I'm not saying that's definitely the way to go, but just giving you something to think about. >If any of you think that arranging conversations by months offers advantage >in any form, then I can do so. But in that case, the whole conversation will >be kept in the month when its first message arrives. I think the key thing here is that regardless of how the messages are stored on disk, it should be possible to follow conversations across organizational boundaries, like months. >2. Readable urls: URL corresponding to a conversation can be created from >subject of the first message of a conversation (in the same way as various >blog sites do). Hmm, possibly. But I think that's much less important than the RFC 5064 stable-URL proposal on the wiki. I'd cite that now, but wiki.list.org seems to be down. :( Have you read that page? >Also, in archive-ui, when a message is archived, all the conversations are >generated again. Ideally, we should do minimum amount of work on archiving a >message. I am trying to work this out too. Agreed. This is one reason to think about doing less work to generate a static page and doing the actual final rendering dynamically (with possibly a cache). Cheers, -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From terri at zone12.com Tue May 31 22:55:45 2011 From: terri at zone12.com (Terri Oda) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:55:45 -0400 Subject: [mmgsoc] Pipermail archive UI In-Reply-To: <4DE4F528.6070200@cse.iitd.ac.in> References: <4DE4F528.6070200@cse.iitd.ac.in> Message-ID: <4DE555D1.7020206@zone12.com> > >If any of you think that arranging conversations by months offers > advantage > >in any form, then I can do so. But in that case, the whole > conversation will > >be kept in the month when its first message arrives. > > I think the key thing here is that regardless of how the messages are > stored > on disk, it should be possible to follow conversations across > organizational > boundaries, like months. We talked about this some with the systers team last year, and most of the cases we came up with were along the lines of "I'm looking for this thread from last month..." (which could probably be solved better by search, esp. search that includes the dates so you still have a way to get a month's data shown) Less clear is when someone's goal is more like "I was on vacation and want to catch up on the mailing list" -- monthly views might be more useful for that. Our consensus was that taking away the monthly view would likely be safe if we paired this change with the ability to search by date. Of course, once you can search by date easily, you could just generate monthly archives as saved searches. It might be helpful for you to be able to see our survey results from last year regarding how people actually use the archives. I've shared a copy with you via google docs. I don't think the participants would appreciate having their survey results public, but they're obviously interested in having mailman developers know how they use things, so if anyone else here wants access let me know. Terri