Hi Mark,

======>>> mark lewis, 1:3634/12 wrote:


Originally to: Jon Watson

FWIW2: i think it would be best to do FTN stuffs in the FTN way instead of 
converting back and forth to fit some other format... why generate MSGID numbers 
just to throw them away and use something else locally? pull the messages out of 
the binary FTN PKT file and spit them into a properly designed database that 
recognises and works properly with FTN tech... then write or convert a
"bbs" 
package to work with /that/... the current methods remind me too much of the 
mess we have with QWK tech in the FTN networks that breaks many things and 
causes many problems... "but it is just a message!" fooey! it
goes a lot deeper 
than just skin deep ;)

i like phpBB and use it on my site but i won't try shoving FTN into that mainly 
due to the structural differences...

)\/(ark


<<<====== end quote


The message ID's ARE generated locally by SMF (not PHPBB, but same idea)
and those message IDs are what must be preserved in order to allow SMF to
thread messages properly. Therefore, any message that originated here MUST
come back here with the original SMF message ID intact or it won't thread
(well...none of this is implemented yet, so actually nothing will thread
right now regardless of what it comes in with). Because these message IDs
must come back, I'm skeptical of the success of this method. It's somewhat
unrealistic of me to expect every node through which my messages pass are
going to preserve some proprietary headers I've added for my own system.

In response to your FWIW2 - you're missing the point of what I'm doing
here. I'm not interested in re-creating the wheel by coding yet another web
forum software package to handle FTN messages. I'm interested in taking
something that your average web user (read.."OMG..What's that BLACK
SCREEN?!?!?") is used to and comfortable with and using it to provide
FTN echoes. There are many projects out there, some more successful than
others, that are putting Fido on the web via a complete recreation of a
system as you recommend. I see no need to add another when with a little
tweaking, existing systems can be integrated to provide the same, or nearly
the same, functionality.

I'm not creating an interface for current FTN users (although they are more
than welcome to use it). Those users have already proven that they are
willing and able, and maybe even prefer, telnetting around the internet.
I'm going for the users that don't even know what Telnet is in an effort to
get more users involved in various FTNs.

WRT threading, I think I'll code to the subject matching thing for now....I
don't see a healthy future for any other method at the moment.

Jon


--- Internet Rex 2.29