[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: comp.lang.ruby FAQ

E F van de Laar

4/22/2005 10:13:00 PM

* hal9000@hypermetrics.com (hal9000@hypermetrics.com) wrote:
> RUBY NEWSGROUP FAQ -- Welcome to comp.lang.ruby! (Revised 2005-4-14)
>
> This FAQ contains information for those who want to:
>
> 1) learn more about Ruby, and want to
> 2) post to comp.lang.ruby or to the ruby-lang mail list, or want to
> 3) provide anonymous feedback to help us improve Ruby.

[snip]

> 2.5 What are these 6-digit message numbers?
>
> Historically, every item on the mailing list had a subject
> starting with a string like: [ruby-talk:99999]
>
> The message numbers were convenient since they were strictly
> serial and formed a good way to refer to a past message. But
> they interfered with threading; Matz removed them after the
> matter was put to a vote in early 2002.
>
> The news header still refers to this number, should anyone
> wish to retrieve it. On the mailing list this number can
> now be found in the X-Mail-Count: header.
>
> You can point to a specific message by appending it onto the
> ruby-talk.com URL; i.e. http://ruby-talk... will refer
> to message 12345. (NOTE: The above was true, but is not
> currently working.)

I know that this feature no longer works but was it at ruby-talk.com
or ruby-talk.org? What happened to ruby-talk.com? Should we just
mention ruby-talk.org here? Just a heads up.

Cheers,

Emiel
--
Emiel van de Laar
1 Answer

Hal E. Fulton

4/22/2005 11:37:00 PM

0

Emiel van de Laar wrote:
>>
>> You can point to a specific message by appending it onto the
>> ruby-talk.com URL; i.e. http://ruby-talk... will refer
>> to message 12345. (NOTE: The above was true, but is not
>> currently working.)
>
>
> I know that this feature no longer works but was it at ruby-talk.com
> or ruby-talk.org? What happened to ruby-talk.com? Should we just
> mention ruby-talk.org here? Just a heads up.
>

I hadn't noticed that. I think these were more or less synonyms,
but the .com variant(s) is/are gone now.

Thanks,
Hal