[Foundation-l] Request to allow Google to search list archivesagain

Sun Apr 27 19:39:03 UTC 2008

To my mind, the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks, unless 
someone can create an argument that hasn't occurred to me yet (which is not 
un-likely, since this isn't a question I've pondered in great depth).

Philippe

--------------------------------------------------
From: "David Goodman" <dgoodmanny at gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 2:01 PM
To: <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com>; "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" 
<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request to allow Google to search list 
archivesagain

> absolutely no. G already indexes much too many of the incidental
> discussions at WP.
>
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
>> I support this especially as url's to old messages are not stable.  An 
>> effective search is greatly needed.  I have spent a long time on occasion 
>> for searching for things I am certain exist and came up with nothing.
>>
>>  Birgitte SB
>>
>>
>>  --- On Sun, 4/27/08, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  > From: Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com>
>>  > Subject: [Foundation-l] Request to allow Google to search list 
>> archives again
>>  > To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>>  > Cc: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" 
>> <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>>  > Date: Sunday, April 27, 2008, 12:30 PM
>>
>>
>> > [courtesy copy to foundation-l, though I suggest that
>>  > discussion, if any, be
>>  > centralised on wikitech-l]
>>  >
>>  > Hi all,
>>  > the search index for the mailinglist archives was last
>>  > rebuilt in January.
>>  > Now, after having made quite a few queries about this here
>>  > and at other
>>  > places, I learnt (and obviously had to accept) that
>>  > rebuilding the search
>>  > index is quite a resources-consuming process which resulted
>>  > in crashes.
>>  >
>>  > To put it bluntly, I dare suggest from a non-technical POV
>>  > that the "htdig"
>>  > (that's the name, isn't it?) experiment has failed.
>>  > If we can only update
>>  > our search index every 6 months or so, it is pointless to
>>  > have it.
>>  >
>>  > Instead, I suggest that
>>  > http://lists.wikimedia.org/robots.txt be modified as
>>  > to allow Google (and other search engines) to crawl
>>  > /pipermail/ again. I do
>>  > not really see the privacy issues of this, nabble, gmane
>>  > etc. are
>>  > google-searchable as well and I really don't see the
>>  > point in barring Google
>>  > from our own archive.
>>  >
>>  > If I am very honest, I do not even remember anymore, why we
>>  > decided to bar
>>  > Google from http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail.
>>  > Was it due to privacy concerns? If so, which, and why is
>>  > lists.wikimedia.orgas an archive different from
>>  > Nabble/Gmane?
>>  >
>>  > Thanks,
>>  > Michael
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > --
>>  > Michael Bimmler
>>  > mbimmler at gmail.com
>>  > _______________________________________________
>>  > foundation-l mailing list
>>  > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>  > Unsubscribe:
>>  > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>>  Be a better friend, newshound, and
>>  know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
>> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>>
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  foundation-l mailing list
>>  foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l 