Re: Report on experimental mvgroup implementation

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Forrest J Cavalier III (forrest@mibsoftware.com)
Date: Mon Aug 13 2001 - 16:00:52 CDT


(For the record, draft-02 had mvgroup. There have
been some wording changes.)

draft-05 wording for single mvgroup is at
       http://mibsoftware.com/userkt/usefor/05/0112.htm
(and from there, links to draft-04, which also has
links to previous wordings.)

> However, if people want to do so, then we have to discuss it. The sad
> thing in this case is that only 3 people are taking significant part in
> the discussion. We could do with some more opinion (paricularly on the
> simplfied proposal I have put forward).
>

I expressed an opinion earlier, mostly along the lines of
you can't move articles around. It breaks one of the
fundamental assumptions of NNTP: that you can address
an article by (newsgroup,number)

If by the "simplified proposal" you mean mvgroup = newgroup + rmgroup
with no article moving, then yes, that seems much better to me.

I think that the multiple mvgroup feature is unnecessary.
Someone contemplating mvgroup should not get the idea that
this is easy and well supported. I'd rather see a couple
of extra mvgroup messages go through.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.