From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/35276
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: drafts/queue and edited messages.
Date: 09 Mar 2001 18:17:48 -0500
Message-ID: <2ng0gm352b.fsf@tiger.jia.vnet>
References: <m3d7bq8rt6.fsf@gnus.cvs.983032537>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035171044 2086 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:30:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:30:44 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <owner-ding@gnus.org>
Original-Received: (qmail 10847 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2001 23:17:51 -0000
Original-Received: (qmail 10842 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2001 23:17:51 -0000
Original-Received: from roc-24-93-30-91.rochester.rr.com (HELO zsh.yi.org) (root@24.93.30.91)
  by gnus.org with SMTP; 9 Mar 2001 23:17:51 -0000
Original-Received: (from zsh@localhost)
	by zsh.yi.org (8.11.0/8.10.0) id f29NHmU08191;
	Fri, 9 Mar 2001 18:17:48 -0500
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
X-Attribution: ZSH
X-Face: 'IF:e51ib'Qbl^(}l^&4-J`'P!@[4~O|&k#:@Gld#b/]oMq&`&FVY._3+b`mzp~Jeve~/#/
 ERD!OTe<86UhyN=l`mrPY)M7_}`Ktt\K+58Z!hu7>qU,i.N7TotU[FYE(f1;}`g2xj!u*l`^&=Q!g{
 *q|<EDbQtg9{wfQuI,#r#{'A,\!95my:/,]"s,O4nzqxNL.}WrHA>ddto|nkt"$r,K$[)"|6,elPH=
 GJ6Q
In-Reply-To: <m3d7bq8rt6.fsf@gnus.cvs.983032537> (Harry Putnam's message of "09 Mar 2001 15:08:00 -0800")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) Emacs/21.0.100
Original-Lines: 25
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:35276
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:35276

Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> writes:

> This has come up a few times but I've lost track of any resolution to
> it.
> 
> Using a semi-stock outgoing message archive and then several
> particular groups where I've set gcc in the group params.
> 
> If I happen to edit a message that has collected in
> ~/News/drafts/queue
> 
> The archived or gcc'ed copy is no longer a faithful copy.
> 
> Is this just unavoidable or can we have code that governs drafts/queue
> and knows where the message came from, its file number and whether
> it is gcc'ed?  If so write them back to the sending group overwriting
> the original.  Maybe the same with the global archive, if the message
> is not gcc'ed.
> 
> Maybe make it a requirement for this code that all groups involved be
> under that same backend.  Avoiding that major problem.

nndraft:queue is not designed for editing. nndraft:drafts is.

ShengHuo