Обсуждение: archive links broken?

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh33paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3mbno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de

etc...


-- 
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/                        +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.

On 04/03/2017 09:43 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com
> <mailto:jd@commandprompt.com>> wrote:
>
>     https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh33paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
>     <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh33paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de>
>
>     https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3mbno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
>     <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3mbno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de>
>
>
> Yes, those links are clearly incorrect.
>
> The part that you're not telling us is where you found them...

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170402225015.GC10244@fetter.org


>
> //Magnus


-- 
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/                        +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.

Magnus,

* Magnus Hagander (magnus@hagander.net) wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
> wrote:
> > On 04/03/2017 09:43 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com
> >> <mailto:jd@commandprompt.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh3
> >> 3paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
> >>     <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161206034955(dot)bh
> >> 33paeralxbtluv(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de>
> >>
> >>     https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3m
> >> bno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de
> >>     <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161208213441(dot)k3
> >> mbno4twhg2qf7g(at)alap3(dot)anarazel(dot)de>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, those links are clearly incorrect.
> >>
> >> The part that you're not telling us is where you found them...
> >>
> >
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170402225015.GC10244@fetter.org
>
> I only see a single link like that in there,
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/63201ef9-26fb-3f1f-664d-98531678cebc@2ndquadrant.com,
> and it works fine.
>
> The links you've listed above don't appear there AFAICT?  (searching for
> /message-id/)

There's a few that point to postgr.es:

Under 'Suppress implicit-conversion warnings seen':

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170220141239(dot)GD12278(at)e733(dot)localdomain
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/2839(dot)1490714708(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us

Do we have some hack to avoid screwing up links for
postgresql.org/message-id that needs to be updated to also look at
postgr.es/m/ links..?

Thanks!

Stephen

Magnus,

* Magnus Hagander (magnus@hagander.net) wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > Do we have some hack to avoid screwing up links for
> > postgresql.org/message-id that needs to be updated to also look at
> > postgr.es/m/ links..?
>
> Ah yes, that's it. Right now it's loking for /message-id/<looks like an
> email address>. I guess we need to expand that to also handle the /m/ links.
>
> Should we do it for basically /(m|message-id/(xxxx), or do oyu think we
> need to actually limit it by the domain name as well? (We don't limit the
> postgresql.org one, but /message-id/ might be more unusual?)

I'd do one of two things- either not make assumptions about what other
domains do, or not hack up things that look like URLs and start with
either http:// or https:// ...

I mean, we're already detecting that URLs are, well, URLs, right?
Otherwise, how are they showing up as links at all?  Seems like it
should be possible to avoid mucking with anything that will end up
becoming a URL on the website.

Thanks!

Stephen