Sourceforge archive and Nabble.com disagree

[NathanGray]

A recent post to [e-mail], as archived and delivered to me, a subscriber:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_name=22455595.post%40talk.nabble.com

The same post, according to nabble.com:
http://www.nabble.com/Notes-and-doubts-about-GL-td22455595.html

Note the difference in question 1), "GL accounts" vs "GL account_groups"

Why the difference, and what steps should be taken to prevent this?

[Graham Perrin]

It's normal for a Nabble user to have the option to update their content in Nabble, and for updated content to be marked as such.

Example: <http://www.nabble.com/Need-%28please%29-to-contact-the-owners-of-top-level-OpenOffice-in-Nabble-1-tp21204042p21204085.html> is marked:

> …updated Mar 12, 2009…

— but I see no such marking at <http://www.nabble.com/Notes-and-doubts-about-GL-p22455595.html>.

Curious.

[Graham Perrin]

Graham Perrin wrote

It's normal for a Nabble user to have the option to update their content in Nabble, and for updated content to be marked as such.

In some circumstances, revision marks seem to be missing.

[Graham Perrin]

If the post was edited within one hour of submission, no revision mark will apply. <http://n2.nabble.com/Revision-marks%3A-edited-messages-not-marked-as-such-tp2517365p2519536.html> explains.

[NathanGray]

Thanks for digging into that.
The explanation sounds reasonable, although I disagree with the action.

[Graham Perrin]

Three or four aspects to this, I'd like to bounce ideas off you (and other readers) …

1. A poster to a developer list (we find this example of a message that differs from a probable edition in Nabble) should have observed the clear yellow banner, during edition, forewarning that changes will not be sent to the list.

— Easier said than done, I recall making many such mistakes when I was new to Nabble; it took me some time to 'get' the ways in which Nabble and SMTP-oriented mailing lists interact with each other.

2. I quite like a period of grace. It's often normal to edit, post submission, for example <http://n2.nabble.com/Receiving-spam-through-Nabble-tp2525010p2536585.html> edited by me to refer to a subsequent spin-off topic.

3. I often make mistakes, and wish to highlight (not hide) those mistakes after the event, so that if a message is found by some other reader and treated as a point of reference, the reader does not follow my mistake.

— I'd like an easier way to strike through text in Nabble; this was originally amongst my top five wishes but it's effectively demoted to #7 (off the radar) by a couple of things.

— still, for any correction that should be pushed to readers, I would send a reply (drawing attention to the correction).

Thoughts?

Regards
Graham