[jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] Email archive?

[Cay Horstmann]

I don't know what you all decided to do with jsr-314-eg. I can't see
it with my login. If you said it was not originally open, and
therefore it's not appropriate to have an open archive, that's
certainly defensible.

But jsr-314-open should really be in an open archive. I have an mbox
file with all messages between 2009-04-03 and 2010-02-16. If that's
something that can be imported easily into the JBoss archive, that
would be great.

That would leave a couple of small gaps, and they could probably wait
until the JCP finally gets their act together.

2010/11/5 Andy Schwartz <andy.schwartz at oracle.com>:
> On 11/4/10 11:33 PM, Cay Horstmann wrote:
>>
>> I was looking for an open archive of JSR-314-open, but all I could
>> find started a few months ago:
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jsr-314-open-mirror and
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.jsr314.
>>
>> Wasn't there an earlier archive on archives.java.sun.com or jcp.org?
>> (I looked but maybe not in the right place?)
>>
>
> The archive for jsr-314-eg is here:
>
> http://archives.java.sun.com/cgi-bin/wa?A0=JSR-314-EG
>
> This covers July 2007 - May 2009.
>
> The archive for jsr-314-open is here:
>
> http://archives.java.sun.com/cgi-bin/wa?A0=JSR-314-OPEN
>
> This covers March 2009 - June 2009.
>
> Both of these require login to view.
>
> This sadly leaves a gap, starting in June 2009, that isn't covered by any
> available archive.
>
> Dan's mission, before the expert group was disbanded, was to get all of
> these archives, including the threads from the missing periods:
>
> 1.  Online.  And...
> 2.  Accessible without login.
>
> I still think that this is a very critical goal for JSF.
>
> While I am grateful for the effort that JBoss has made in making the latest
> archives available on lists.jboss.org - and I have been taking full
> advantage of the ability to share these publicly accessible links -  this
> looks like a stop-gap measure to me.  It's been over a year since we first
> reported the problems with our archives to the JCP.  We need the JCP to
> finally come through and provide a more formal solution.
>
> Andy
>
>
>