From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Fri Aug 03 2001 - 18:05:03 CDT
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> So would a fair summary be to say that the present INN mechanisms are
> "Ugly" (I think that was your word) and need to be fixed when tuits are
> available? And that when it gets fixed, making it cope sensibly with
> aliasing and mvgroup could be incorporated as part of the fix without
> undue extra difficulty? But that this particular fix (though desirable)
> is low on the priority list at the moment?
That sounds fair.
>> That leaves incorrect information in the Xref header of the article.
> Yes, but in a revised system you might not need to change it at all.
The only way that one can avoid having to change the article is if the
Xref header isn't actually included in the article but instead is faked up
by nnrpd whenever the article is retrieved. That's almost as ugly to me.
Readers expect the header to be present, and having it be present but
incorrect is just a recipe for disaster IMO.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>