Re: #1416

["Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <873alhollc.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>This is the topic that we've gone back and forth on at some length.  To
>summarize my opinion:

>* I'm not sure that having all messages have Injection-Date header fields
>  should be a general goal of this work.  The header is primarily useful
>  when Date is well in the past and not that useful otherwise.  It's
>  certainly fine if we get there, but I don't think getting there is a
>  high priority.

>* The Injection-Date feature will not realistically be able to be used to
>  allow for articles with very old Date headers for the forseeable future,
>  possibly ever.  It will require upgrading all servers to use
>  Injection-Date rather than Date, which I think is very unlikely to
>  happen.  Accordingly, the benefit of servers adding Injection-Date is
>  fairly minor for the forseeable future; the only effect will be somewhat
>  more correct behavior with articles with borderline Dates.

>* Given the very slow development pace of netnews software, I think
>  backward compatibility should be our highest goal.

Not surprisingly, I take an opposite view on all of the above.

>I'm unlikely to change my mind in this area, but I'm happy to be
>overridden by the working group if other people just don't agree with me.
>If that happens, I'll gladly prepare a document that implements Charles's
>approach.

>I think a working group chair needs to decide if that's happened.

Agreed. Clearly Russ's vote for IR is cancelled out by my vote for IC, so
it is the rest of the WG that gets to make the choice. But we need to get
that choice made so that we can move on.

-- 
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      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