This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 99355 - Emails are no longer archived
Summary: Emails are no longer archived
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: obsolete
Classification: Unclassified
Component: collabnet (show other bugs)
Version: 5.x
Hardware: All All
: P2 blocker with 4 votes (vote)
Assignee: issues@www
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-03-29 10:02 UTC by Tomas Hurka
Modified: 2009-11-08 02:37 UTC (History)
11 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Tomas Hurka 2007-03-29 10:02:40 UTC
It looks like email are no longer not archived in mailing list archive on www.netbeas.org. The archived 
emails are from late February 2007.
Tested on the following archives:
http://openide.netbeans.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=cvs
http://openide.netbeans.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=issues
http://core.netbeans.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=cvs
http://core.netbeans.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=issues
http://j2ee.netbeans.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=cvs
http://j2ee.netbeans.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=issues

I was not able to find any mailing list archive which has archived emails from March 2007.
Comment 1 jcatchpoole 2007-03-29 12:15:52 UTC
Collab did this for us, as we specifically requested this, see issue 36647.  Do
you need those archives ?
Comment 2 Tomas Hurka 2007-03-29 12:56:22 UTC
I was not aware of that. Yes, it is handy from time to time especially those cvs@ archives. I wanted to refer 
to particular commit in openide module in the issuezilla.  Now this is not possible AFAICT. 
Comment 3 Tomas Hurka 2007-03-29 13:05:25 UTC
Reading issue 36647, I think that archiving of issues@ mailing are not needed since all relevant data can 
be accesses via issuezilla queries, but cvs@ mailing list are important. They group together committed 
files and provides possibility to refer to particular commit. 
Comment 4 Jan Stola 2007-03-29 14:09:19 UTC
I agree with thurka. I have never used the issues@ archive, but I regularly use 
cvs@ archives. I also wasn't aware of the issue 36647 and I am missing the cvs@ 
archives by now.
Comment 5 Tomas Pavek 2007-04-11 16:46:10 UTC
+1 I also miss the cvs archive.
Comment 6 rbalada 2007-04-11 17:00:04 UTC
-1 vote. 

Let's drop *all* CVS email archives and finally implement INF on nb.org website.
AFAIK we are ~10 weeks away.
Comment 7 jcatchpoole 2007-04-12 10:34:21 UTC
*** Issue 100748 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 8 Petr Jiricka 2007-04-12 10:46:00 UTC
> Let's drop *all* CVS email archives and finally implement INF on nb.org website.
> AFAIK we are ~10 weeks away.

I don't care what will be in 10 weeks. I care about what we have now and the
current situation is unacceptable. We can talk when INF is done, until then I
want the CVS alias archive.
Comment 9 Andrei Badea 2007-04-12 13:14:31 UTC
+1 the cvs archive was useful, it should be brought back.
Comment 10 Vince Kraemer 2007-04-12 15:46:18 UTC
veto for turning the issues@*.netbeans.org archives back on.  IZ is enough of an
interface to make these lists irrelevant.

Redirect for cvs@*.netbeans.org archiving.... I noticed that we have a fisheye
on the repository...  http://deadlock.nbextras.org/fisheye/browse/netbeans

I have used fisheye for many of the searches that I have used the
cvs@*.netbeans.org mailing list archives for in the past.

This search let me see all the commits to the serverplugins/sun since 22 Mar
2007...
http://deadlock.nbextras.org/fisheye/search/netbeans/serverplugins/sun?fromdate=2007-03-22T00%3A00%3A00&groupby=changeset


It seems like there is bit of a time lag between the commit and its appearance
in the fisheye search results... but the time lag appears to be less than 24
hours... That has been good enough for most of the searches that I had been doing.
Comment 11 rbalada 2007-05-23 16:45:32 UTC
*** Issue 104381 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 12 jcatchpoole 2008-03-21 13:40:08 UTC
*** Issue 129820 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 13 Marian Mirilovic 2009-11-08 02:37:18 UTC
We recently moved out from Collabnet's infrastructure