From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/37715 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jody Klymak Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] NNDiary, a diary backend for Gnus. Date: 11 Aug 2001 11:10:23 -0700 Organization: Ocean Mixing Group, Oregon State U. Message-ID: <3d6ya2nk.fsf@oce.orst.edu> References: <3d6z5z8c.fsf@oce.orst.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035173082 15288 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 04:04:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:04:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Return-Path: Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 9119 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 18:10:38 -0000 Original-Received: from dnsman.oce.orst.edu (128.193.64.33) by gnus.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2001 18:10:38 -0000 Original-Received: from C1699372-A.mail.oce.orst.edu (c1699372-a.crvlls1.or.home.com [65.12.163.179]) by dnsman.oce.orst.edu (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id LAA11640; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 11:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) In-Reply-To: (Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE's message of "Sat, 11 Aug 2001 14:13:15 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090003 (Oort Gnus v0.03) XEmacs/21.4 (Academic Rigor) Original-Lines: 42 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37715 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37715 Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes: > Jody Klymak writes: > > > I'm guessing that what nndiary does is look through a group, message > > by message, and decide if any of them need to be set to "UNREAD". > > Does this require a separate backend? > > No, for marking messages, no special backend is required. After all, > you can hit M-u in nnimap groups, right? Right! > It would be desirable to rewrite all them thingies so that they can > extend any other backend. For example, WIBNI nndraft could store your > drafts on the IMAP server? Then you could access them from any host. > > Thoughts? Well I tried to think about it. I think that a backend is for different methods of receiving mail (and hiding it from gnus). The difference between nndraft and nnimap backend is that nndraft 1) writes to disk instead of mailing 2) reads messages from disk. The advantage being that you need not be online to compose your draft message. Perhaps this is not different from nnml, but it is different from nnimap. However, nndiary requires that you send yourself the message (and even run it through procmail!). So it seems to me that, conceptually, you could get most of the backend functionality through your backend of choice. I don't understand nndiary well enough to know if its added functionality requires the low-level placement of a backend or not. A bunch of stuff happens when you enter the group and when you display the summary buffer; maybe these manipulations are easier to handle at the backend level. Cheers, Jody -- Jody M. Klymak mailto:jklymak@oce.orst.edu College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sicences Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331