Thread: Re: No easy way to join discussion in existing thread when not subscribed
Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: >> So far, I've been downloading the mbox, importing it to my mail >> client and then replying and it's quite cumbersome. > On 09/28/2015 04:07 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Andres Freund (andres@anarazel.de) wrote: >> On 2015-09-28 08:44:18 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: >>> My hope is to convince Magnus to add that (or maybe I'll try and write >>> it myself..) and then have a macro in mutt which grabs the Message-ID of >>> the current message and pulls down the mbox and opens it. The montly mbox only updates once a day, you sometimes need to wait for several hours to send a reply, so a single-message mbox would be helpful. But the "mail me a copy" link solution would be even better, and would works with all mail clients out of the box. >> > <...> having the ability to pull down an mbox format of just > the thread would be helpful. That's a capability which I'm also > interested in and which could be useful to a lot of people, regardless > of their mail client. > If you use mutt, you're good, but I don't. How friendly is the following process is, keeping in mind that this is what a new member of the community, interacting for the first time, goes through: 1. Oh! Good thread on pgsql-hackers, I think we should paint it azure blue. Let's send my first message to the list! 2. Wait, what's the address to send to? looks around (but that's ok) 3. Now, how do I get my message into the thread? (prolonged googling and SO/superuser hunting) 4. Oh, I need a copy of the original message (no header editing in my email client. Many users use webmail) How do I get one? Alternatively, how do I edit headers in gmail/web, and what exactly do I need to add (google some more). 5. aha, the website provides mbox, let's go! 6. Wait, I need to register to download? this is getting ridiculous. 7. Register. Refresh*3. Get an a email. click the verify link. 8. Go back and download the mbox. 9. Ok, how do I import the mbox into my client? (googling some more) 10. Need an addon, (googling, choosing among alternatives). Install. Restart. 11. Ok, ready, how do I use it? (create a special mail folder, import mbox). 12. 1500 messages, what was the thread name again (go to browser, find thread, search, locate thread, located message). 13. Hit reply and post. Getting from 1 to 13 can take well over an hour, perhaps two. By that time, you may not remember why you started this whole thing in the first place and have formed a fairly strong impression of life in postgresville. And soon after *that*, you learn there's no bugtracker. Regards, Amir
* Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: > Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: > >> So far, I've been downloading the mbox, importing it to my mail > >> client and then replying and it's quite cumbersome. > > On 09/28/2015 04:07 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Andres Freund (andres@anarazel.de) wrote: > >> On 2015-09-28 08:44:18 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > >>> My hope is to convince Magnus to add that (or maybe I'll try and write > >>> it myself..) and then have a macro in mutt which grabs the Message-ID of > >>> the current message and pulls down the mbox and opens it. > > The montly mbox only updates once a day, you sometimes need to wait for > several hours to send a reply, so a single-message mbox would be > helpful. But the "mail me a copy" link solution would be even better, > and would works with all mail clients out of the box. My thinking about the mbox format would be an mbox of the entire thread, not just of an individual email. Having the whole thread can be useful for a couple of reasons (for example, if you want to reply to more than one email in a single email). I'd expect it to be generated on-the-fly just like the 'flat' (now 'whole thread') view is. That said, I've got nothing against the mail-me-a-copy option being available when you're logged in with your community account. > > <...> having the ability to pull down an mbox format of just > > the thread would be helpful. That's a capability which I'm also > > interested in and which could be useful to a lot of people, regardless > > of their mail client. > > If you use mutt, you're good, but I don't. How friendly is the following > process is, keeping in mind that this is what a new member of the > community, interacting for the first time, goes through: I'm not convinced that being a new member of the community has much to do with any of this. > 1. Oh! Good thread on pgsql-hackers, I think we should paint it > azure blue. Let's send my first message to the list! > 2. Wait, what's the address to send to? looks around (but that's ok) > 3. Now, how do I get my message into the thread? (prolonged googling > and SO/superuser hunting) > 4. Oh, I need a copy of the original message (no header editing in my > email client. Many users use webmail) How do I get one? > Alternatively, how do I edit headers in gmail/web, and what exactly > do I need to add (google some more). > 5. aha, the website provides mbox, let's go! All of the above does not impress me terribly much. If the individual isn't familiar with mailing lists in general, it's unlikely that we're going to get over that hurdle very easily. Certainly, lots of people have tried to make mailing lists easy for the web 3.0 crowd but I've not seen a particularly successful one yet. > 6. Wait, I need to register to download? this is getting ridiculous. You don't have to register to download the mbox, you just have to 'log in', where 'logging in' is reading the authorization prompt and putting in what it tells you. > 7. Register. Refresh*3. Get an a email. click the verify link. > 8. Go back and download the mbox. > 9. Ok, how do I import the mbox into my client? (googling some more) > 10. Need an addon, (googling, choosing among alternatives). Install. > Restart. > 11. Ok, ready, how do I use it? (create a special mail folder, import mbox). > 12. 1500 messages, what was the thread name again (go to browser, find > thread, search, locate thread, located message). I have this frustration with mutt. :) Which is why I'd like an mbox of just the thread that I want to reply to. > 13. Hit reply and post. > > Getting from 1 to 13 can take well over an hour, perhaps two. > By that time, you may not remember why you started this whole thing > in the first place and have formed a fairly strong impression of > life in postgresville. When I started in postgresville, I was already familiar with mailing lists from being a Debian Developer. A friend of mine introduced me to both Debian and mailing lists back when I was using Slackware (having converted over from FreeBSD and, prior to that, BSDi). At that time, I was also introduced to mailing lists and learned that the way to get started in a community was to subscribe to the mailing lists and watch the traffic and then jump in when I saw a conversation that I could contribute to. I certainly understand that things are different today and more things need to be 'web-3.0-y', but while I do think having the ability to download the thread as an mbox or having a link to 'send me a copy' which works when you're logged into your community account will help, I'm not really sure it's going to make for a markedly different experience for the kind of user you're mimicking. Here's a fun question- is there some way we could integrate with gmail? Or is there a gmail archive (or a way of getting our email archived by gmail) such that a user could find threads/email in gmail and then reply to them that way? Or a way we could integrate, provide scripts, or at least directions, for users of other email clients? > And soon after *that*, you learn there's no bugtracker. Yes, well, we're making some progress on that now. I've got a few other things which are higher priority given that we have a drop-dead date for beta, but I'm hoping to get to it soon. Thanks! Stephen
On 09/29/2015 04:50 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: >> The montly mbox only updates once a day, you sometimes need to wait for >> several hours to send a reply, so a single-message mbox would be >> helpful. But the "mail me a copy" link solution would be even better, >> and would works with all mail clients out of the box. > > <...> > I'd expect it to be generated on-the-fly just like the 'flat' (now > 'whole thread') view is. > Just pointing out that the monthly one isn't, which makes it even less useful. >> If you use mutt, you're good, but I don't. How friendly is the following >> process is, keeping in mind that this is what a new member of the >> community, interacting for the first time, goes through: >> <long venting list> > > > I'm not convinced that being a new member of the community has much to > do with any of this. Improving the mbox feature would help everyone who uses it, but the original issue was "I'm not subscribed and wish to join my first thread" and it's the *first time* you use the mbox feature that is at its worst. Presumably, it would be a good thing if people have a good experience when they first join in the conversation. > >> <long venting list> > > All of the above does not impress me terribly much. Sorry to hear that. It is perhaps precisely the point that you as a veteran aren't impressed by all that, while as a newcomer I found it exasperating and off-putting. Ironically, once I started participating on the lists, I've been consistently surprised by the helpfulness and patience of the people on it. > If the individual isn't familiar with mailing lists in general, it's > unlikely that we're going to get over that hurdle very easily. But we can and should address specific pain points. >> 6. Wait, I need to register to download? this is getting ridiculous. > > You don't have to register to download the mbox, you just have to 'log > in', where 'logging in' is reading the authorization prompt and putting > in what it tells you. > I stand corrected, while admitting that I missed that message accompanying the HTTP Basic Auth dialog, went and registered, and now it doesn't ask for a password anymore. Perhaps I was inattentive, but the web has established norms now: "Enter user/pass" triggers the "go register" behaviour because that's how it works on every login form everywhere. >> 12. 1500 messages, what was the thread name again (go to browser, find >> thread, search, locate thread, located message). > > I have this frustration with mutt. :) Which is why I'd like an mbox of > just the thread that I want to reply to. > Me too, I'm just saying that only solves one problem and not another, while a "mail me the thread/message" feature solves both. If you implements "mail copy of message", the cost of implementing "mail copy of thread message" is probably O(0), amortized. > <"...making this change or that, or being more web 3.0 like"> > I'm not really sure it's going to make for a markedly different > experience for the kind of user you're mimicking. > Not going there. I accept that some time and effort is required of people when they join a new community. Now, This one thing I mentioned is suboptimal, can we please improve it? > Here's a fun question- is there some way we could integrate with gmail? Perhaps, but I don't use gmail. >> And soon after *that*, you learn there's no bugtracker. > > Yes, well, we're making some progress on that now. I've got a few other > things which are higher priority given that we have a drop-dead date for > beta, but I'm hoping to get to it soon. > I'd be glad to help implement whatever works, if someone points me at the code for the website. Amir
Stephen Frost wrote: > * Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: > > The montly mbox only updates once a day, you sometimes need to wait for > > several hours to send a reply, so a single-message mbox would be > > helpful. But the "mail me a copy" link solution would be even better, > > and would works with all mail clients out of the box. > > My thinking about the mbox format would be an mbox of the entire thread, > not just of an individual email. Having the whole thread can be useful > for a couple of reasons (for example, if you want to reply to more than > one email in a single email). The one I've wanted myself sometimes is "mbox of the entire commitfest", mainly for offline review of patches in a CF -- where the ones that are actual submissions are starred or something like that. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: > > > > The montly mbox only updates once a day, you sometimes need to wait for > > > several hours to send a reply, so a single-message mbox would be > > > helpful. But the "mail me a copy" link solution would be even better, > > > and would works with all mail clients out of the box. > > > > My thinking about the mbox format would be an mbox of the entire thread, > > not just of an individual email. Having the whole thread can be useful > > for a couple of reasons (for example, if you want to reply to more than > > one email in a single email). > > The one I've wanted myself sometimes is "mbox of the entire commitfest", > mainly for offline review of patches in a CF -- where the ones that are > actual submissions are starred or something like that. Agreed, that would be helpful too. Thanks! Stephen
Amir, * Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: > It is perhaps precisely the point that you as a veteran aren't impressed > by all that, while as a newcomer I found it exasperating > and off-putting. Ironically, once I started participating on the > lists, I've been consistently surprised by the helpfulness and > patience of the people on it. Apparently I didn't convey my thoughts on it very well. What I was getting at is that these are largely problems which are related to using mailing lists and which are not specific to our community (I'd expect someone to have similar issues getting involved with Debian, for example). I'm all for working to improve on it. > > If the individual isn't familiar with mailing lists in general, it's > > unlikely that we're going to get over that hurdle very easily. > > But we can and should address specific pain points. Sure, but how? The 'mail-me-the-email' idea seems workable, but it'd be awful nice if there was an easy way to import an entire thread into your MUA of choice. > >> 6. Wait, I need to register to download? this is getting ridiculous. > > > > You don't have to register to download the mbox, you just have to 'log > > in', where 'logging in' is reading the authorization prompt and putting > > in what it tells you. > > I stand corrected, while admitting that I missed that message > accompanying the HTTP Basic Auth dialog, went and registered, > and now it doesn't ask for a password anymore. Perhaps I was > inattentive, but the web has established norms now: > "Enter user/pass" triggers the "go register" behaviour because > that's how it works on every login form everywhere. I'm not sure there's anything we can do about that. Do you have any suggestions? It's pretty clear in the Auth dialog, imv. The prompt is: Please authenticate with user 'archives' and password 'antispam' > >> 12. 1500 messages, what was the thread name again (go to browser, find > >> thread, search, locate thread, located message). > > > > I have this frustration with mutt. :) Which is why I'd like an mbox of > > just the thread that I want to reply to. > > Me too, I'm just saying that only solves one problem and not another, > while a "mail me the thread/message" feature solves both. > If you implements "mail copy of message", the cost of implementing > "mail copy of thread message" is probably O(0), amortized. eh, I'm not sure it's quite that simple, and for my part, being able to wget the mbox would be much better than having it mailed to me. > Now, This one thing I mentioned is suboptimal, can we please improve it? I don't believe anyone is stopping you, or someone else, from moving forward on the mail-a-copy proposal, but there's work to be done there and a number of us are quite occupied with getting ready for 9.5 beta1 or with other projects. > > Here's a fun question- is there some way we could integrate with gmail? > > Perhaps, but I don't use gmail. Sure, but a lot of people do. My general point was that it'd be neat if we could provide tools to make it easier for users to integrate. > >> And soon after *that*, you learn there's no bugtracker. > > > > Yes, well, we're making some progress on that now. I've got a few other > > things which are higher priority given that we have a drop-dead date for > > beta, but I'm hoping to get to it soon. > > I'd be glad to help implement whatever works, if someone points me > at the code for the website. I assume you're referring to the above changes to the archives system, not the bug tracker debate, so, the archives code is here: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgarchives.git;a=summary The website code is here: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary Thanks! Stephen
Magnus, Please, see attached patch adding a "whole thread[as mbox] link" to pgarchives, by popular request upthread. It checks hiddenstatus, but does materialize the entire raw thread in memory (including attachments) to form the response, which is unbounded in principle and can be sizable in practice. Perhaps django can do streaming requests, so we can bound the memory usage + timeout. It's been a while. If you'd like changes (hard limits, strip attachments, etc'), do let me know. On 09/29/2015 03:51 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >>> I have this frustration with mutt. :) Which is why I'd like an mbox of >>> just the thread that I want to reply to. >> Here you go. >> I'd be glad to help implement whatever works, if someone points me >> at the code for the website. > > I assume you're referring to the above changes to the archives system, > not the bug tracker debate, so, the archives code is here: > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgarchives.git;a=summary > > The website code is here: > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary > I'd be glad to help with the bugtracker too, if things have converged, I haven't followed that thread closely. Cheers, Amir p.s. The web archives already support a single-message mbox download. It's the "raw" view. I didn't realize and... *neither did any of you* ;)
Attachment
Amir, * Amir Rohan (amir.rohan@mail.com) wrote: > On 09/29/2015 03:51 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > >>> I have this frustration with mutt. :) Which is why I'd like an mbox of > >>> just the thread that I want to reply to. > >> > > Here you go. Thanks! > >> I'd be glad to help implement whatever works, if someone points me > >> at the code for the website. > > > > I assume you're referring to the above changes to the archives system, > > not the bug tracker debate, so, the archives code is here: > > > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgarchives.git;a=summary > > > > The website code is here: > > > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary > > > > I'd be glad to help with the bugtracker too, if things have converged, > I haven't followed that thread closely. I don't believe there's much help which can be provided at this point; it's mostly just install-and-setup, which requires someone on the infra team. > The web archives already support a single-message mbox download. > It's the "raw" view. I didn't realize and... *neither did any of you* > ;) Oh, I'm aware of the raw format, but it's just the one message, not the entire thread. Thanks! Stephen
Re: No easy way to join discussion in existing thread when not subscribed
From
Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Date:
On 09/29/2015 05:51 PM, Amir Rohan wrote: > Magnus, Hi Amir! > > Please, see attached patch adding a "whole thread[as mbox] link" > to pgarchives, by popular request upthread. Thanks a lot for the patch - I took a quick look at the patch and have a few comments to make.. > > It checks hiddenstatus, but does materialize the entire raw thread > in memory (including attachments) to form the response, which > is unbounded in principle and can be sizable in practice. > > Perhaps django can do streaming requests, so we can bound > the memory usage + timeout. It's been a while. this is dangerous - the box we are running on has limited resources(especially RAM) and we have already seen bots crawling our archives causing issues. We do have frontend caching for the archives but a large thread is likely way too big to be cached - and while it is HTTP-BASIC protected we have seens various browser plugins (like ones doing "intelligent prefetching" or other weird things causing issues). Have you done any (approximate) measurements on what the additional in-memory overhead in both pg (to build the response) and in django is compared to the resulting mbox? > > If you'd like changes (hard limits, strip attachments, etc'), > do let me know. some other things: * while this is a preexisting issue in the code (most of the http auth requests are handled directly in lighttpd so nobody noticed so far i guess) please use "Please authenticate with user 'archives' and 'password' antispam" * have you verified that the resulting mbox actually contains the newline seperator after each message(I have not checked whether the source data has it)? * are you sure that using unicode() for building the output is going to work on all input? - I dont think you can assume that the source data is ASCII clean and/or has only valid unicode code points for mapping Stefan > > On 09/29/2015 03:51 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >>>> I have this frustration with mutt. :) Which is why I'd like an mbox of >>>> just the thread that I want to reply to. >>> > > Here you go. > >>> I'd be glad to help implement whatever works, if someone points me >>> at the code for the website. >> >> I assume you're referring to the above changes to the archives system, >> not the bug tracker debate, so, the archives code is here: >> >> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgarchives.git;a=summary >> >> The website code is here: >> >> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=pgweb.git;a=summary >> > > I'd be glad to help with the bugtracker too, if things have converged, > I haven't followed that thread closely. > > > Cheers, > Amir > > p.s. > > The web archives already support a single-message mbox download. > It's the "raw" view. I didn't realize and... *neither did any of you* > ;) > > > >