Karen at Rootsweb has just sent listowners some information on the archiving process and how it will change, come December 1. Be sure to email me your opinions, as you know I am very new to all of this stuff. Heck, I am still taking comments about the "Reply to list" thing....So far about 60% in favor of reply to list, 40% against.... I wish I felt more strongly one way or the other. I think I will make a message up from comments from both angles. This message is about the Archives, though, so here goes: They are planning a new "web-based" system and will be turning off the old "e-mail based" system of accessing the archives. From Karen: >1. Once the new (web-based) system is on line, we will be turning off the >old (e-mail based) system of accessing archives. Experience has shown >that it is hard on the system (uses too many CPU cycles on large lists), >and hard on the user (difficult to understand, tricky syntax) and hard >on the system administrators ... (I know that not everyone has web >access -- you might want to have a few volunteers on each list who will >do lookups for those without web access.) > >2. So, what's the new web-based system to be? Evolving, for a start. >In the initial phases, for those lists that are participating, the >most recent messages will be available via the web in a threaded >format. (This is what Marc has been working on.) The older messages >(including the old Maiser archives) will be available via a clunky >search engine (like that used for ROOTS-L on http://searches.rootsweb.com). >(I've been working on this, at least, until I got diverted by all that >stuff up there in the first paragraph.) We hope to do two additional >things: find a new search engine that will index both the threaded and >unthreaded message bases, and as time allows, convert the unthreaded >message bases to threaded. There are some open issues here that we >haven't worked through yet, so it will be awhile, but that's the target. > >3. What about passwords? These have proven much more controversial >than I ever expected. I do understand (shoot, I pushed for them) why >they are useful and solve a lot of problems. The difficulty is that >they seem to introduce at least as many problems as they solve. Some >of which hit closer to home than I like (such as whiney letters to >[email protected] asking what the password is). Anything that >requires more work from the system administration people is almost >guaranteed to be a non-starter, and passwords unfortunately fit that >criteria. Besides having to deal with people who can't remember passwords >or who type them in the wrong case, etc., there's also the problem >that to change a password will require manual intervention (we haven't >developed the software yet so the listowner could do so automatically), >and a password that is stable and never changed isn't much security. >If your archived messages need to be secure, a simple password won't >be enough to secure them. If your archive messages don't need to be >secure, then there's no need for a password. Bottomline: passwords >make more work, but add little additional security. So, no passwords, at >least not for now, probably never. > >4. Can you edit the archives? No, at least, not now. The tools >to let you do so aren't available, and the time for someone (me) to >do it for you is in too short of supply. Except for cases of >egregious copyright violation, death threats, etc, I won't be >available to edit your archives for you. I know this means there >will be some cruft, subscribe/unsubscribe commands, reposted digests, >spam, etc. For most lists, even with the cruft, the signal to noise >ratio will still be quite high. > >5. Does your list have to participate? No. ... Note >that, if your list doesn't participate in the web-based archives, >there will be no access to your archives unless you make alternative >arrangements (for instance, through your ISP) to provide such. If you >decide you do want to set up your own message archive elsewhere, we >will zip up your old archives here (including the old messages from >Maiser, if any) and put them somewhere so you can FTP them. Not all >lists want archives (hi, Wally!): if that describes your list, just >opt out of the web-based archives, and voila!, you're set. > >6. What if you have a single [person]... who doesn't want his/her messages >included? You have some options. a) You can simply not participate. >b) You can tell him/her tough, and go ahead and participate. c) You can >ask that we not include your material from before the cutover (see >below), and tell [him or her]... that anything he/she posts after the >cutover will be included... > >Target date for the cutover: 1 December 1997. That should provide time >for you to touch base with your listmembers (if you so desire), and >for us to further shakedown the scripts that will be used to make >all this happen. Marc's beta-test will probably be back online before >then. From me: PLEASE let me know how you feel about the archives being so open to everyone without a password and all....and if you still want the archives. I don't mind the archives at all, but if you feel strongly about this, let me know. For those of you who have had trouble accessing the archives lately, I think it has been off-line (ref. to Marc above), so give it another chance. I have all of the list in Digest Form from Day One, and can send these to anyone who requests them from me. Not indexed or anything. Just a simple forwarding of them. It would help if you could give me the dates you're missing. I'm sorry this list has been so quiet lately, on my end. Have been busy working on the October (!) issue of Spindle. Hope to get it out this month! Also for those of you who have contacted me on specific lines, I am behind on correspondence. Feel free to post to the list, otherwise I will get to them some time, I promise! If anyone has sent Jim Kunkle of Denver the lists so far, please let me know which ones, as I plan to send them to him this month. I know he will be frustrated not having the "snail mail" addresses attached to them, but am hoping I have them in my database somewhere & can put them on for him. Janet ==== KUNKEL Mailing List ==== To send a message to everyone, send it directly to: [email protected], or reply to an individual message and note "send to all recipients" or whatever your system has for this option.