From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF8731F404; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 02:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 02:07:54 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: =?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s_Ojeda_B=C3=A4r?= Cc: meta@public-inbox.org Subject: Re: Relationship between public-inbox and ssoma? Message-ID: <20180305020754.GA11496@dcvr> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: List-Id: Nicolás Ojeda Bär wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks very much for this great project. > > I am a bit puzzled about the difference between public-inbox and ssoma. In particular: > > - What is the difference between public-inbox-mda and ssoma-mda ? public-inbox-mda is more suitable for public endpoints where it's the primary entry point for a publically-shared mail. ssoma-mda is/was intended for personal mail. Originally, public-inbox depended on and used ssoma, but that was given up for more performance. Sidenote: I don't recommend public-inbox-mda for running _mirrors_ of existing mailing lists since it's stricter than what most lists accept. public-inbox-watch is more lenient and more performant (on Linux with inotify, at least); so I wrote it for mirroring. > - Are the git repository formats the same for public-inbox and ssoma ? Currently they are the same with one exception: ssoma allows two different messages (different blob SHA-1) to have the same Message-Id by default; public-inbox (current version) does not. (ssoma-mda has a "-1" option to disable duplicate Message-Id). The work-in-progress "v2" public-inbox format diverges and I don't currently have plans to port ssoma to use it. The v1 format will remain supported in public-inbox. I'm not sure if ssoma is worth the effort any more, as it's too much effort to promote a new sync protocol (even if based on git). I'd rather improve NNTP servers and clients as an option for people to read public inboxes. > Any comments appreciated. > > Thanks a lot! No problem, thanks for your interest.