From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/50827 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: total and auto expiry Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:17:59 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <84wuj3krdk.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> References: <87k7f3pbgf.fsf@forexware.com> <84isunrxf7.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> <7ysmtrf74n.fsf@myxomop.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1047593571 2213 80.91.224.249 (13 Mar 2003 22:12:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:12:51 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Thu Mar 13 23:12:48 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18tawS-0000ZG-00 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:12:48 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18tavx-0007x5-00; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 16:12:17 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Thu, 13 Mar 2003 16:13:18 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (sclp3.sclp.com [66.230.238.2]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA27951 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 16:13:06 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 4420 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2003 22:12:00 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 4414 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2003 22:11:59 -0000 Original-Received: from mailout05.sul.t-online.com (194.25.134.82) by 66.230.238.6 with SMTP; 13 Mar 2003 22:11:59 -0000 Original-Received: from fwd02.sul.t-online.de by mailout05.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18tYE4-00053X-09; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:18:48 +0100 Original-Received: from lucy (520080024987-0001@[80.135.123.205]) by fmrl02.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 18tYDb-03XR1kC; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:18:19 +0100 Original-Received: by lucy (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 47C90287BB; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:17:59 +0100 (CET) Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <7ysmtrf74n.fsf@myxomop.com> (Alexander Kotelnikov's message of "Thu, 13 Mar 2003 13:34:16 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090016 (Oort Gnus v0.16) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Sender: 520080024987-0001@t-dialin.net Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:50827 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:50827 Alexander Kotelnikov writes: >>>>>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 18:25:32 +0100 >>>>>> "KG" =3D=3D Kai Gro=DFjohann wrote: > KG>=20 > KG> Alexander Kotelnikov writes: >>> Does this mean that the only difference between actions that are taken >>> over groups matching 'total' and 'auto' it that the former will be >>> expired even if expiry-wait for it is 'never? > KG>=20 > KG> No. I think setting expiry-wait to never means that nothing is > KG> expired. > KG>=20 > KG> Normally, you can mark a message as expirable by hitting `E'. > KG>=20 > KG> Auto-expire means that Gnus hits `E' for you. Nothing more, nothing > KG> less. > KG>=20 > KG> Total-expire means that messages marked E are expirable, as always, > KG> but *also* messages marked r, R, Y, K and so on are considered > KG> expirable. > > Thus the one difference is an article's mark. Its destiny, to be or > not to be expired, is the same, if group is matched with total or auto > variable. Yes. > This also means that "total" described as dangerous is not too much > more dangerous than "auto", isn't it? Before you turned on total-expire, you might have read hundreds of messages which are suddenly considered expirable. This is (potentially) dangerous. > KG> Adaptive scoring does not work with auto-expire because it depends on > KG> the different marks r, R, Y, K etc. But using auto-expire means that > KG> messages will be marked E, instead. > KG>=20 > KG> It used to be that total-expire was slower than auto-expire. I don't > KG> know whether this is still true. > > So it can be advised to use total with adaptive scoring and auto > otherwise. At first approximation they are the same. Except for the above, yes. Another difference is that total-expire means that you lose one mark. With auto-expire, you can distinguish between ticked (!), dormant (?) and read (R) articles, all of which are kept. With total-expire, you only have ticked and dormant. --=20 A preposition is not a good thing to end a sentence with.