nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[era]

I noticed that setting the process mark on a bunch of articles and
then pressing `o' works as expected up to the point when I'd expect
the thing to be done ... but then it starts asking me again where to
file messages, this time one by one (and failing, since they were
already batch moved from underneath).

I'm saving to another IMAP folder on the same server. This is with
Gnus 5.8.8 as distributed in Debian "stable", which includes an nnimap
which is apparently version 0.131. This is the separate Gnus Debian
package, not the Gnus included with Emacs itself. I'm using SSL but I
hardly imagine that matters. The server is an Exchange server but IIRC
I've been seeing the same symptoms against an uw-imapd server too.

Before I spend any more time investigating this, I thought I'd ask
whether this is still happening in newish nnimap and Gnus releases.
And if not, could anybody tell me when it was fixed (so I know what to
want to upgrade to, eventually -- recall that bleeding-edge Gnus will
probably not be available on Debian stable for some time to come)?

Thanks in advance,

/* era */

-- 
The email address era     the contact information   Just for kicks, imagine
at iki dot fi is heavily  link on my home page at   what it's like to get
spam filtered.  If you    <http://www.iki.fi/era/>  500 pieces of spam for
want to reach me, see     instead.                  each wanted message.

Re: nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[Simon Josefsson]

era@iki.fi writes:

> I noticed that setting the process mark on a bunch of articles and
> then pressing `o' works as expected up to the point when I'd expect
> the thing to be done ... but then it starts asking me again where to
> file messages, this time one by one (and failing, since they were
> already batch moved from underneath).

'o' and process marks work in a special way; instead of saving all
articles to one file, it queries you for a file to save each process
marked message in.

> I'm saving to another IMAP folder on the same server.

With 'o'?  'o' saves to a rmail file on local disk, at least in my
Gnus.

> Before I spend any more time investigating this, I thought I'd ask
> whether this is still happening in newish nnimap and Gnus releases.
> And if not, could anybody tell me when it was fixed (so I know what to
> want to upgrade to, eventually -- recall that bleeding-edge Gnus will
> probably not be available on Debian stable for some time to come)?

I'm not sure what you described is a bug, so I suspect it still
happens.

Maybe what you want to do instead is to use `B c' to copy the articles
between two IMAP folders?  It support process mark in a nicer way, as
well.

Re: nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:45:31 +0200, Simon Josefsson
>>>>> <jas@extundo.com> said:

> era@iki.fi writes:
>> I noticed that setting the process mark on a bunch of articles and
>> then pressing `o' works as expected up to the point when I'd expect
>> the thing to be done ... but then it starts asking me again where to
>> file messages, this time one by one (and failing, since they were
>> already batch moved from underneath).

> 'o' and process marks work in a special way; instead of saving all
> articles to one file, it queries you for a file to save each process
> marked message in.

The variable gnus-prompt-before-saving can control this.  Set it to t
and you'll be prompted once and all the subsequent messages will be
appended to the initial file.  But...

> Maybe what you want to do instead is to use `B c' to copy the articles
> between two IMAP folders?  It support process mark in a nicer way, as
> well.

It sounds like that's what the OP really needs.


-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[era]

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:45:31 +0200, Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>
posted to gmane.emacs.gnus.general:
 > era@iki.fi writes:
 >> I noticed that setting the process mark on a bunch of articles and
 >> then pressing `o' works as expected up to the point when I'd expect
 >> the thing to be done ... but then it starts asking me again where to
 >> file messages, this time one by one (and failing, since they were
 >> already batch moved from underneath).
 > 'o' and process marks work in a special way; instead of saving all
 > articles to one file, it queries you for a file to save each process
 > marked message in.
 >> I'm saving to another IMAP folder on the same server.
 > With 'o'?  'o' saves to a rmail file on local disk, at least in my
 > Gnus.

OK, I guess this needs a bit of clarification. Here's the deal: I'm
getting mail into my regular INBOX and I archive it to a folder based
on what sort of action is required; change requests go in a TODO
folder, stupid jokes from well-intentioned people who just discovered
email go in junk, etc. So I want to move messages to another folder,
and I discovered that (generally speaking) the `o' command does that.

Here's how it's defined here:

  o runs the command gnus-summary-save-article
     which is an interactive compiled Lisp function in `gnus-sum'.
  (gnus-summary-save-article &optional N NOT-SAVED)

  Save the current article using the default saver function.
  If N is a positive number, save the N next articles.
  If N is a negative number, save the N previous articles.
  If N is nil and any articles have been marked with the process mark,
  save those articles instead.
  The variable `gnus-default-article-saver' specifies the saver function.

And:

  gnus-default-article-saver's value is 
  gnus-summary-move-article

  Documentation:
  A function to save articles in your favourite format.
  The function must be interactively callable (in other words, it must
  be an Emacs command).

  Gnus provides the following functions:

  * gnus-summary-save-in-rmail (Rmail format)
  * gnus-summary-save-in-mail (Unix mail format)
  * gnus-summary-save-in-folder (MH folder)
  * gnus-summary-save-in-file (article format)
  * gnus-summary-save-in-vm (use VM's folder format)
  * gnus-summary-write-to-file (article format -- overwrite).

  You can customize this variable.

  Defined in `gnus-art'.

And:

  gnus-summary-move-article is an interactive compiled Lisp function in `gnus-sum'.
  (gnus-summary-move-article &optional N TO-NEWSGROUP SELECT-METHOD ACTION)

  Move the current article to a different newsgroup.
  If N is a positive number, move the N next articles.
  If N is a negative number, move the N previous articles.
  If N is nil and any articles have been marked with the process mark,
  move those articles instead.
  If TO-NEWSGROUP is string, do not prompt for a newsgroup to move to.
  If SELECT-METHOD is non-nil, do not move to a specific newsgroup, but
  re-spool using this method.

  For this function to work, both the current newsgroup and the
  newsgroup that you want to move to have to support the `request-move'
  and `request-accept' functions.

  ACTION can be either `move' (the default), `crosspost' or `copy'.

Admittedly it doesn't say anything about process/prefix convention so
perhaps it was misguided to use it in the first place. But since it
almost works, making it work "right" might be worth the effort.

 > Maybe what you want to do instead is to use `B c' to copy the articles
 > between two IMAP folders?  It support process mark in a nicer way, as
 > well.

Thanks for the pointer; I'll try using that (or rather `B m') instead.

/* era */

-- 
The email address era     the contact information   Just for kicks, imagine
at iki dot fi is heavily  link on my home page at   what it's like to get
spam filtered.  If you    <http://www.iki.fi/era/>  500 pieces of spam for
want to reach me, see     instead.                  each wanted message.

Re: nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On 01 Oct 2003 08:28:56 +0300, era@iki.fi said:

>   gnus-default-article-saver's value is 
>   gnus-summary-move-article

Interesting.  I would not have thought of doing that.  I just tried it
to see if gnus-prompt-before-saving would affect it.  Unfortunately it
didn't.  No matter the setting, I got a prompt for each article
although when set to t, it looks like all marked articles were moved
after the first prompt and the subsequent ones were superfluous.  I'm
not sure I consider that a bug worth fixing, though since this is
really not the intended use of the gnus-default-article-saver
mechanism.

> Thanks for the pointer; I'll try using that (or rather `B m') instead.

I think that's your best bet.

-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[Simon Josefsson]

era@iki.fi writes:

>   gnus-default-article-saver's value is
>   gnus-summary-move-article

Oh, I see.

> Admittedly it doesn't say anything about process/prefix convention so
> perhaps it was misguided to use it in the first place. But since it
> almost works, making it work "right" might be worth the effort.

I agree, but the behaviour seem to be documented, and frobbing
gnus-prompt-before-saving appear to be needed to get it to use your
definition of "right".  Haven't tested it though.  Perhaps a case
could be made for changing the default value.

Documentation:
*This variable says how much prompting is to be done when saving articles.
If it is nil, no prompting will be done, and the articles will be
saved to the default files.  If this variable is `always', each and
every article that is saved will be preceded by a prompt, even when
saving large batches of articles.  If this variable is neither nil not
`always', there the user will be prompted once for a file name for
each invocation of the saving commands.

Re: nnimap 0.131 asks twice when saving marked articles

[era]

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:46:58 +0200, Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>
posted to gmane.emacs.gnus.general:
 > era@iki.fi writes:
 >> gnus-default-article-saver's value is
 >> gnus-summary-move-article
 > Oh, I see.
 >> Admittedly it doesn't say anything about process/prefix convention so
 >> perhaps it was misguided to use it in the first place. But since it
 >> almost works, making it work "right" might be worth the effort.
 > I agree, but the behaviour seem to be documented, and frobbing
 > gnus-prompt-before-saving appear to be needed to get it to use your
 > definition of "right".  Haven't tested it though.  Perhaps a case
 > could be made for changing the default value.

Somehow I had overlooked this final hint, and now finally rediscovered
it on my own. :-/ It's exactly what I was looking for all along. Thanks.

Maybe the functions whose behavior are influenced by the value of this
variable should include a reference to it in their docstrings?

/* era */

-- 
The email address era     the contact information   Just for kicks, imagine
at iki dot fi is heavily  link on my home page at   what it's like to get
spam filtered.  If you    <http://www.iki.fi/era/>  500 pieces of spam for
want to reach me, see     instead.                  each wanted message.