Problem due to lack of HTML date-stamp

From: <HyperMail_www_at_associate.com_at_hypermail-project.org>
Date: 15 Mar 1999 20:20:56 -0500
Message-ID: <19990316012056.17478.qmail_at_associate.com>

Has anyone else noticed that HTML files generated by HyperMail are not date-stamped in the name? That's obvious. But on a site where the HTML archives are rotated daily, the lack of date-stamping can make new HTML files appear to be read, even though they are new (if they've been read within the last few days, for example).

I've never done wildcards in C before (is it possible?) But my thought would be to add a "seconds" stamp, like that in the lock file, to the HTML file names. Something like 0000-12657890.html

The seconds "field" could be ignored by the counting routines, and included when creating the indexes.

Just an idea.

glen_stewart_at_associate.com Received on Tue 16 Mar 1999 03:23:20 AM GMT