From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Tue Mar 07 2000 - 12:03:23 CST
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> Sure, if in-place updates are possible, the whole problem goes away.
Agreed. That's another of the reasons why I want them. They solve a
multitude of problems. :) I think taking INN's history mechanism that
direction will be much easier than trying to support duplicates in dbz.
> The solution proposed before was intended for current systems where
> updating history in situ was just not on (but we still need that
> solution as a fall back, because many servers still operate that way).
*nod* I don't expect to see many existing servers implementing Replaces
as a high priority, but I could be wrong. I'd expect to see them make
changes like in-place history edits that make such features a lot easier
first.
> Fine! Do we actually need Xref header in articles anymore if the
> information is in the voerview?
Yeah, for slaving. But otherwise, not really for readers, if they can get
it from overview.
> Anyway, the missing mapping is the one from API to article numbers. That
> is the one we need do the Replaces properly. It can be done by going to
> the article and extracting the Xref, but there may be simpler ways.
I don't know of a simpler way with INN's current design. The storage API
token is an end-product sort of thing; it's not intended to be converted
back into anything other than the actual article.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>