(Since this affects everybody, I've kept it on ietf@xxxxxxxx, but feel free to switch to tools-discuss@xxxxxxxx if you prefer.) On 09/03/2014 04:47, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi Brian, > > On 2014-03-08 16:07 Brian E Carpenter said the following: >> Henrik, >> >> I find the new archive highly inconvenient for reviewing a thread >> or a chronological sequence on a given list. This can be done >> at glance with the old archives with one line per message. With >> the new one, it's matter of figuring what filter to set up. I have >> found it *much* harder to find a particular thread than with the >> old archive. > > Ok. I thought we'd provided for this, but if what we've done isn't good > enough, we may need to do something more about it. > > The intention was that the 'Group by Thread' button above the list of > messages, to the left of the search field, should provide a thread view. > > However, I find that for the main IETF list, getting a thread-sorted > view is unbearably slow, while it works OK for the WG lists I've just > checked. Personally I find that I still miss some kind of indication > of where each thread starts, though. Yes, and searching for a thread when you remember the approximate date and the topic, but not the actual text in the Subject, is not easy. With the old archive you can page down quite quickly and do a quick scan of the Subject headers. > >> Please consider providing a subject-threaded and a topic-threaded >> view of a single list into the new archive. We definitely need >> a view equivalent to this one for every list: >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/maillist.html > > That's the date/time sorted view of the old archive. If I in the new > archive (taking the long route here, to make sure that my assumptions > are explicit ) go to the main page: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org > > and click on 'browse' underneath the search field, I get to the page > listing all the list archives: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ > > Here I click on the list in your example, 'apps-discuss', which gives > me a (by default) date-sorted view of the apps-discuss list, where I > see a list of the latest messages for apps-discuss. I can scroll the > message list pane, to see earlier messages, and also expand the list > page to show a larger number of messages at one time. (There's a bug > which doen't fill the list pane fully if you expand the size beyond the > preloaded list entries, but this will be fixed shortly.) > > I've enclosed a screen capture image to illustrate what I see at this > point. Thanks, that's good to know. I compared results from the new tool at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=ipv6 and the old tool at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/maillist.html With default font size, I get more messages per screen with the old tool, and I get the senders' screen names rather than their email addresses. However, the main thing I lack with the new tool is the "Next Page" button that allows me to jump back in time by a reasonable quantum. If the new tool had "Back one month" and "Back one year" buttons to supplement "Past month" and "Past year", I would be much happier. (Probably corresponding "Forward" buttons would be needed too.) > >> A generalised search tool does not provide the same convenience. > > Agreed; it was our intention to provide also thread-grouped views, > and the list date-ordered view I described above. > >> Also it would be handy to have a way to download a raw archive. > > This should be available from the 'Export' dropdown in the upper right- > hand corner, in both mbox and (gzipped tar) Maildir format; if used for > an unfiltered list view it should export the list archive; if used with > a search it should export the search results. OK; the only thing is that on my screen, the Export button is obscured behind the results window. So I didn't even know it was there ;-) Getting back to Bjoern's original point, I think it would be valuable if the page for an individual message include a link back into the search mechanism (not just the sign in link). Anyway - thanks for all the work on the new tool. I'm sure it will end up being very valuable. Brian > > > Best regards, > > Henrik > >> Regards >> Brian >> >> On 09/03/2014 03:44, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: >>> Hi Björn, Dale, >>> >>> On 2014-03-07 23:02 Bjoern Hoehrmann said the following: >>>> * Dale R. Worley wrote: >>>>> I've noticed that recently messages to the Ietf mailing list have been >>>>> sprouting "Archived-At" headers. This seems to be a great >>>>> convenience. But when I attempted to use one of these links, >>>>> http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/rvA1yLD7Ds2BAxWYv3iN1ONAxJs >>>>> it turned out not to be what I expected -- it contained the message, >>>>> but none of the threading that I've learned to love in IETF mail >>>>> archives. >>> Right. However, updating the single-message view is on the to-do list. >>> >>>>> Which is all rather odd, since there *is* a URL that goes to the >>>>> "real" archive, and does give access to the threading: >>>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg86465.html >>>>> Why is that URL not put into the Archived-At header? >>> 2 reasons: >>> >>> * That URL goes to the old archives, not to the new archives >>> at mailarchive.ietf.org. We're aiming at phasing out the old >>> archives once it's been established that the new service is >>> solid. >>> >>> * That url will break if for some reason the archive pages have to >>> be re-generated due to later inclusion of list messages which didn't >>> originally make it into the archive for one reason or another. It's >>> happened a few times, and the way MHonArc generates the web pages >>> guarantees breakage if a dropped message has to be added. This is not >>> the case with the current Archived-At headers, which use a hash generated >>> by hashing Message-ID and list acronym, and is independent of any particular >>> sequence or ordering of messages in the list archive. >>> >>>>> Though to put the shoe on the other foot, I notice that the *former* >>>>> archive will show me the full headers of the message if I want, but >>>>> the latter archive won't. >>> Yes. The latter (the old MHonArc archive) only includes some selected >>> headers in what's made available in the web page; one of many deficiencies >>> the new archive software aim to fix. >>> >>>> I assume there are some technical reasons, Henrik Levkowetz (copied) >>>> might be able to comment. >>> I hope the information above helps. >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Henrik >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>