Issue 4895 - interface-announce mails are not archived
Summary: interface-announce mails are not archived
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Infrastructure
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: Mailing lists (show other issues)
Version: current
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Unknown
QA Contact: issues@www
URL: http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/Su...
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2002-05-15 12:50 UTC by stx123
Modified: 2003-12-06 14:52 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description stx123 2002-05-15 12:50:36 UTC 
Hi Joerg,
mails to interface-announce@openoffice.org are not archived (see URL above).
I first assume it has to do with the HTML format, but for features@ it works.
If you are sure, that used HTML is same/similar, reassign this issue to the 
default owner of the component.
Comment 1 epost 2002-05-22 12:58:18 UTC 
Mail source does not substantially differ from the source code of the feature- 
announcements. Both deliver HTML- Code, _both_ have a minor HTML- bug in the form of a 
missing </BODY>- tag.
Comment 2 stx123 2002-05-22 13:39:57 UTC 
So, why are mails to interface-announce@openoffice.org not archived?
Comment 3 stx123 2002-06-03 20:54:37 UTC 
reassigning to support
Comment 4 Unknown 2002-06-03 21:14:51 UTC 
This will be investigated as part of the same internal issue looking
into the discuss@ archiving ( issue 5403 ).
Comment 5 Unknown 2002-06-04 01:13:22 UTC 
An engineer has been assigned to work the issue with our operations
department.
Comment 6 Unknown 2002-06-05 01:20:56 UTC 
A developer continues to be engaged, but there is no solution yet.
Comment 7 Unknown 2002-06-07 02:24:01 UTC 
This list has a more serious issue than discuss@openoffice. The
eyebrowse index appears to be completely out of sync with what is in
the file.
To resolve this, the developers would like to re-index the file from
scratch. This will fix the archiving problem, but has the down side of
breaking any pre-existing hyperlinks to individual messages. 
Is this of great concern to you or should we proceed with re-indexing?
Comment 8 stx123 2002-06-07 09:46:32 UTC 
Please go ahead with re-indexing.
Comment 9 Unknown 2002-06-07 23:46:54 UTC 
The list has been reindexed and shows messages to the current date.
Please let us know if there are any that still appear to be missing.
Comment 10 stx123 2002-08-30 15:05:22 UTC 
verified and closing...