From: Jose Kahan (jose.kahan@w3.org)
Date: Fri Jun 06 2003 - 08:34:12 CDT
Kent,
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 07:29:02AM -0500, kent landfield wrote:
> jose.kahan@w3.org (Jose Kahan) writes:
> > maybe some people would want it for other reasons.
>
> I guess we don't have much choice. My real issue with it is that people
> who use it will have to forever use it on those archives with 0001 start
> instead of taking a one time hit and correcting those two-three months of
> archives. Personally I'll manually correct the archives I manage so I
> will not have to keep remembering this small special case in the future.
> I rebuild archives from scratch quite often and this could become a
> problem as I age and my memory fails... ;)
I completely agree with you and reached the same conclusion that it's
better to upgrade the mbox, Either it's all 0000 or all 0001 but
remembering when to do 0000 and when to do 0001 is hard.
For those people who have only been working with 0001 and have not
rebuilt their archives, the option will be useful. For all the
others, it's better that we advice them that they need to pad
their original mboxes or do something else to avoid breaking links
when rebuilding.
Is it ok if I commit the bug fix in the meantime? And if you want
the new option, I can code and commit it later today. We still have
time for discussing this.
-jose