From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/74529 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sivaram Neelakantan Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: deleting articles from search groups? Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 23:33:48 +0530 Message-ID: <8262vg3t2z.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87eia5p2qn.fsf@andy.bu.edu> <87mxotav3x.fsf@uwo.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1291053859 22762 80.91.229.12 (29 Nov 2010 18:04:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:04:19 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M22888@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Nov 29 19:04:15 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PN85E-0000lC-LK for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 19:04:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PN855-0001J7-29; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:04:03 -0600 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1PN853-0001Ix-ST for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:04:01 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PN852-0002Gz-Rp for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:04:01 -0600 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1PN852-0007Cl-00 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 19:04:00 +0100 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PN850-0000fB-Fv for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 19:03:58 +0100 Original-Received: from 122.179.110.62 ([122.179.110.62]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 19:03:58 +0100 Original-Received: from nsivaram.net by 122.179.110.62 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 19:03:58 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 30 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 122.179.110.62 User-Mail-Address: nsivaram.net@gmail.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:I5+Pc9LKyyg8coUIw9KJgPixxrQ= X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin (3.3.1 2010-03-16) analysis follows Bayesian score: 0.0000 Ham tokens: 0.000-1397--2838h-0s--0d--H*M:fsf, 0.000-1306--2653h-0s--0d--H*u:Emacs, 0.000-1286--2612h-0s--0d--H*u:Gnus, 0.000-821--1667h-0s--0d--H*r:sk:1AlnuQ-, 0.000-821--1667h-0s--0d--HX-Spam-Relays-External:80.91.229.12 Spam tokens: Autolearn status: no 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is freemail (nsivaram.net[at]gmail.com) 0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is CUSTOM_MED 1.2 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.9 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED ADSP custom_med hit, and not from a mailing list 0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:74529 Archived-At: On Mon, Nov 29 2010,Dan Christensen wrote: > Andrew Cohen writes: > >> But after doing this, I'm wondering whether or not this is a good >> idea. Should we worry that someone might be surprised that an action on >> the results of a search has the effect of deleting an article >> permanently from its original group? > > Maybe it's worth asking the user, since deletion is permanent? This is > done in gnus-summary-delete-article if gnus-novice-user is set. Since > that's the only occurrence of that variable in gnus-sum.el, maybe you > could just set that variable in nnir groups?? Or maybe you want a > customized question: "Deleting articles will delete them from the > original groups. Proceed?" > I second this. Though, I think there might be use cases where people might want to only delete in the searched articles to keep the search list sane or refine it further by simply deleting the matches that were false positives. That's within the search context and not permanent deletion. [snipped 10 lines] sivaram --