On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 02:16:08AM -0700, Dave Cross wrote: > From: Leon Brocard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 10/2/01 9:41:44 AM > > I've moved my mail from laptop to laptop to new company > > computer over the years and it's dawned on me that I > > never (that is NEVER) need archives which are more than a > > week or so old. > > > > Agressive deletion is the only way. > This is _so_ true. And there's nothing more satisfying[1] than > deleting a couple of thousand emails from a mailbox :)
I tend not to filter everything into seperate folders, I just read my inbox in chronological order. Yes, I delete messages having read them, but I *do* have a procmail filter which makes a copy of every single post, before any other filters. Every month or so I compress that archive folder and keep it. There are a few lists which I filter into their own folders, but neither london.pm nor (void) are one of them. > And don't most mailing lists have searchable web-based archives > anyway? For some definitions of searchable. Generally you can easily search by subject and by date, but that doesn't help when you have obscene amounts of thread drift and you can't remember that it was the February 2000 that someone posted the PROM monitor command you need. In any case, it's not as if archives take that much space. david@plough:~/archived$ ls -l inbox-2001* -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 13531466 Feb 1 2001 inbox-2001-01.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 11796117 Mar 5 2001 inbox-2001-02.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 12473481 Apr 8 17:33 inbox-2001-03.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 13945763 May 16 22:28 inbox-2001-04.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 12550679 Jun 6 14:55 inbox-2001-05.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 15536947 Jul 11 12:28 inbox-2001-06.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 20028672 Aug 4 21:04 inbox-2001-07.gz -rw-rw-r-- 1 david users 19995496 Sep 10 14:00 inbox-2001-08.gz -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Good advice is always certain to be ignored, but that's no reason not to give it -- Agatha Christie
