sourceware hardware transition plan, part 1/N

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:09:35PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> >> Should we rsync stuff over and then start working on a ezmlm->mailman
> >> translation?  We'll also likely need to do a lot of work to keep URLs
> >> correct.
> >
> >(My original thought was that the existing mhonarc archives would be
> >preserved, so existing URLs would stay valid; just new archives would
> >go to a new http url hierarchy.)
> 
> Ah, that would be easier.  So we just have an "old" archive which
> preserves the old ml and a "new" one.
> 
> So, would it make sense to populate the new archive with old content too
> just for consistency?  We'd have duplicate content but it seems like it
> would be less confusing to end users.

It would be less confusing, avoid URL instability if we ever again in 
future wish to remove a message from the archives and preserve useful 
features such as raw versions of messages just to keep using mhonarc with 
the same URL structure as now, and make any mailman/pipermail URLs 
redirect to the /ml/ mhonarc ones so noone ever accesses a message via 
them.  As far as I know mhonarc is maintained.

> I chatted with Ian about this on irc.  The problem with ezmlm and qmail
> is that they are not maintained and, so, are unaware of new standards
> like DKIM.

Does ezmlm actually do any of the sort of changes to messages that would 
break DKIM?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com