Re: [Tools-discuss] historic mailing list archives

["Frank Ellermann" <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz at gmail.com>]

Lars Eggert wrote:
 
> none of these third-party sites is ever complete

Actually *NO* site is ever complete, beginning with
the IETF, because that's a complex issue:

* Many IETF lists are not hosted by the IETF, but by 
  others
* Many lists start their life outside of the "IETF
  other lists" or "IETF WG lists", e.g., IDNAbis
* GMaNe uses its own "group names", e.g., IMAA and
  IMA lists (long before that became the EAI WG)
* Some "IETF" lists on GMaNe never became real IETF
  lists (e.g., CLEAR, COSMOGOL) for various reasons
* Some "other lists" such as xml2rfc or spf-discuss
  end up in other places when available on GMaNe:
  gmane.text.xml.rfc
  gmane.mail.spam.spf.discuss
* IETF lists that didn't interest any GMaNe user
  enough to propose a subscription are unavailable

That can lead to all variations you can think of,
including cases where the GMaNe archive is the best
available archive.  

> the data isn't under our control, they can go away
> and we're left with no archive.

My confidence in GMaNe is stronger than in the IETF
wrt list archives:

GMaNe has search, NNTP access, various web interfaces
with nice picons, access by Message-ID, permalinks,
and the killer application:  Access on a raw message
including all headers, exactly what I need to check
obscure mail and MIME issues.  GMaNe can also filter
obscure "list footers" or "subject tags".  

The IETF list archives offer none of these features,
all essential from my POV.  Of course it's good to
have more than one archive as backup.  And the IETF
certainly needs its own archives for legal reasons
among others.

 Frank
_______________________________________________
Tools-discuss mailing list
Tools-discuss at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss