From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Aug 14 2001 - 04:41:33 CDT
In <200108132104.f7DL4q113655@lima.epix.net> "Forrest J Cavalier III" <forrest@mibsoftware.com> writes:
>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)
Yes. There are two choices (in my modified proposal).
1. You keep both groups around (during a reasonable overlap period).
2. You arrange to serve up the articles whichever newsgroup the client asks
for them in (thus preserving your fundamental NNTP assumption). This
involves an aliasing mechanism (and again lasts during a reasonable
overlap period).
>If by the "simplified proposal" you mean mvgroup = newgroup + rmgroup
>with no article moving, then yes, that seems much better to me.
My proposal was that, plus a MAY implement (2) above.
>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.
I agree with that bit.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5