Personally I could very well live with switching the mailing list
off, but then people have different preferences and I don’t really
expect the mailing list to disappear.
It wouldn’t be a matter of the list disappearing, just having the list
be separate from the newsgroup. For the record, I actually really
like(d) the mirroring. My first choice would be a working mirror, but
I don’t see how to bring that about (though I’d be glad to be proven
wrong), and we’re piling up months and months of inaccurate archives.
Given that the gateway between ruby-talk and comp.lang.ruby is still
not working consistently, I’m wondering whether it’s time to turn off
the gateway entirely and separate the two groups. It seems to me that
partial mirroring is worse than no mirroring.
Dennis (the maintainer) has tried to analyze and fix the problem, but
it appears to be downstream from his system somewhere. I guess it’s
possible to investigate further, but at this point it may be pretty
hard, and meanwhile the unofficial split between the list and the
newsgroup continues to grow. I think it might be better to make it
official.
I don’t know exactly how such a decision would be made, but I figured
the first step would be to see what people think of such a move (not
the idea of mirroring per se, but the idea of turning off mirroring in
light of the fact that it doesn’t work). So… ?
The solution is to repair the mirror, not to give up.
Ummm, OK. Any suggestions?
Not really. I don’t even know what the problem is. Maybe the mantainer can
make the logs and other information accessible, so people will be able to
help or give suggestions.
I could not easily submit to a solution that meant I didn’t see
your contributions, Robert
The python mailing list and newsgroup are united, AFAIK. Better
investigate their solution and experience before giving up.
Gavin
···
On Tuesday, May 25, 2004, 9:58:45 PM, Robert Klemme wrote:
Personally I could very well live with switching the mailing list off, but
then people have different preferences and I don’t really expect the
mailing list to disappear.
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Youngblood [mailto:carl@youngbloods.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 11:36 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby?
Phil Tomson wrote:
I have always preferred reading comp.lang.ruby over subscribing to
ruby-talk (too much mail). I really hope we can keep the two connected.
One other important thing to keep in mind is that some of us are forced
to use ruby-talk because we don’t have access to a news server (other
than through google, which is dog slow). Even though I prefer NNTP, I
can’t use it at work.
Wrote “David A. Black” dblack@wobblini.net, on Wed, May 26, 2004 at 03:15:03AM +0900:
The problem is… they’re not. That’s what I mean about its not being
about the idea of mirroring per se. In theory I’m all for it, but
it’s a question of how many months/years/whatever we want to go on
with the non-working mirror.
Aren’t there a million-and-a-half mail to news gateway implementations
in the world? Is the problem that we’re using some
written-in-ruby-but-not-quite-working gateway rather than one written in
(horrors!) perl or python?
It seems like this kind of gatewaying is a solved problem, and we could
save some pain by using an existing solution, and then spend time
writing marvelous new code, rather than debugging a ruby mail-news
gateway!
Btw, how is helium.ruby-lang.org connected to the Internet (how big is
the pipe, where is the physical location of the server)? I see that helium.ruby-lang.org handles almost all the traffic (MX, SMTP exploder,
website, ftp, and CVS). I also see that the download link for latest
source release has been handled by a script which redirects to random
mirror. What about doing the same for FTP (or restricting the FTP
access) to save bandwidth…
···
In message “Re: separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby?” > on 04/05/26, Martin Pirker crf@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at writes:
Hear ,hear. I’m on the mailing list because of the those very reasons.
I access everything through work.
Sven
···
On 26/05/2004, at 4:06 AM, Carl Youngblood wrote:
Phil Tomson wrote:
I have always preferred reading comp.lang.ruby over subscribing to
ruby-talk (too much mail). I really hope we can keep the two
connected.
One other important thing to keep in mind is that some of us are
forced to use ruby-talk because we don’t have access to a news server
(other than through google, which is dog slow). Even though I prefer
NNTP, I can’t use it at work.
It doesn’t – I mean, many of the ruby-talk posts never make it to
Google. That’s one way I became aware of the problem.
I had the impression Google did correct mirroring… but I have
never verified it.
No, the missing messages never seem to make it to any NNTP server or
archive anywhere. This has been confirmed on Google, my server,
Guy Decoux’s server, and various others.
Is anybody aware of other services which does perfect mirroring (except NSA)?
I don’t think any service ever sees these messages
Personally I could very well live with switching the mailing list
off, but then people have different preferences and I don’t really
expect the mailing list to disappear.
It wouldn’t be a matter of the list disappearing, just having the list
be separate from the newsgroup.
I know that you didn’t propose that. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough… I
was just trying to say that, if we want only one place, then I don’t
mind if it’s not the mailing list. IOW: my preference is news. :-))
For the record, I actually really
like(d) the mirroring. My first choice would be a working mirror, but
Definitely!
I don’t see how to bring that about (though I’d be glad to be proven
wrong), and we’re piling up months and months of inaccurate archives.
I liked the suggestion to make logs public so people can help out / voice
their ideas about possible reasons.
“Gavin Sinclair” gsinclair@soyabean.com.au schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:199906821760.20040525234806@soyabean.com.au…
Personally I could very well live with switching the mailing list off,
but
then people have different preferences and I don’t really expect the
mailing list to disappear.
I could not easily submit to a solution that meant I didn’t see
your contributions, Robert
Oh, thanks a lot! Neither would I like to miss your postings.
The python mailing list and newsgroup are united, AFAIK. Better
investigate their solution and experience before giving up.
Maybe they just use another NNTP host for distribution…
Kind regards
robert
···
On Tuesday, May 25, 2004, 9:58:45 PM, Robert Klemme wrote:
Wrote “David A. Black” dblack@wobblini.net, on Wed, May 26, 2004 at 03:15:03AM +0900:
The problem is… they’re not. That’s what I mean about its not being
about the idea of mirroring per se. In theory I’m all for it, but
it’s a question of how many months/years/whatever we want to go on
with the non-working mirror.
Aren’t there a million-and-a-half mail to news gateway implementations
in the world? Is the problem that we’re using some
written-in-ruby-but-not-quite-working gateway rather than one written in
(horrors!) perl or python?
It seems like this kind of gatewaying is a solved problem, and we could
save some pain by using an existing solution, and then spend time
writing marvelous new code, rather than debugging a ruby mail-news
gateway!
I don’t think it’s the gateway code. It’s worked for years, basically
until about 3-4 months ago. My tests (fairly barebones, but anyway)
suggest that the gateway software is, in fact, passing along the
messages in question. Something is happening further downstream.
I’m still in favor of making the separation official. I understand
all the sentiment that it should be fixed, but I fear we’re just
settling in for an indefinite period of having it not work but
thinking how nice it would be if it did.
Btw, how is helium.ruby-lang.org connected to the Internet (how big is
the pipe, where is the physical location of the server)?
It’s at my company’s office connected with 2 1M lines.
I see that helium.ruby-lang.org handles almost all the traffic (MX, SMTP exploder,
website, ftp, and CVS). I also see that the download link for latest
source release has been handled by a script which redirects to random
mirror. What about doing the same for FTP (or restricting the FTP
access) to save bandwidth…
Connection is OK except for the occasional download bombing.
Maybe we will release 1.8.2 using BitTorrent or something like that.
matz.
···
In message “Re: separating ruby-talk from comp.lang.ruby?” on 04/05/27, David Garamond lists@zara.6.isreserved.com writes:
Is anybody aware of other services which does perfect mirroring (except NSA)?
No one has yet suggested Gmane, maybe there is a good reason for that…
I don’t have any information about it’s perfectness, but currently 5615
mailing lists are using Gmane. See http://gmane.org/ for more information.
The downsides I’m aware of:
comp.lang.ruby would change its name
Google wouldn’t archive the newsgroup
News users would have to add a new server in their reader in
order to read the group
got a full copy
a quick diff by counting message ids:
40419 in ml archive 60000-101400
39565 in my news archive since 20030101
adding both + sort + uniq gives 41533 unique ids
so the gateway isn’t that bad, but there is only a 95% exchange
Over time, yes, but the recent problems are a lot more acute The
current situation seems to have started quite suddenly in late January
of this year. The last message of mine that made it from ruby-talk to
comp.lang.ruby was on January 24 (except for those where I initiate
threads, which do make it through).
The Ruby news-to-ML gateway has had problems for nearly 3 years now by
Google’s reckoning. Whether off and on, and for what all reasons, I don’t
know.
I think it should either be re-built with software that works, or the two
should be separated.
Sean O'Dell
···
On Wednesday 26 May 2004 09:55, David A. Black wrote:
I don’t think it’s the gateway code. It’s worked for years, basically
until about 3-4 months ago. My tests (fairly barebones, but anyway)
suggest that the gateway software is, in fact, passing along the
messages in question. Something is happening further downstream.
Sorry to repeat, but the way GMANE.org works it should be okay.
Gmane.org subscribes to mailing list as a subscriber and get all the posting
os the mailing list. It also allows posting to the mailing list by mailing
to the list on behalf of user.
