From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/71424 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Christensen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: More IMAP testing, please Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:05:11 -0400 Message-ID: <87vd5xpv3s.fsf@uwo.ca> References: <87ocbsuu51.fsf@andy.bu.edu> <87iq20ymof.fsf@rimspace.net> <87mxrb313t.fsf@rimspace.net> <87mxrb6nlv.fsf@lifelogs.com> <877hif6mzd.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87tylj57ka.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <87wrqf56n4.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87tylisxh5.fsf@uwo.ca> <8739t1j4i6.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1285175134 30338 80.91.229.12 (22 Sep 2010 17:05:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:05:34 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M19797@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Sep 22 19:05:31 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 1OySl9-0008U3-Km for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:05:31 +0200 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 1OySl3-0003zC-LU; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:05:25 -0500 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 1OySl1-0003yo-RG for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:05:23 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OySl0-0002rc-Ht for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:05:23 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1OySkz-0003MA-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:05:21 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OySkz-0008Ot-Kl for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:05:21 +0200 Original-Received: from bas3-london14-1096786111.dsl.bell.ca ([65.95.160.191]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:05:21 +0200 Original-Received: from jdc by bas3-london14-1096786111.dsl.bell.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:05:21 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 61 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: bas3-london14-1096786111.dsl.bell.ca User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:0Bvlf2A1jOtiyPVaX2znI4e9xq4= X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:71424 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:33:26 -0400 Dan Christensen wrote: > > DC> Ted Zlatanov writes: >>> It places an extra burden on every user ("what is that? should I use >>> it?") for the sake of the few who don't have UIDPLUS. Articles marked >>> as `E' (expirable) are clearly meant to be deleted sooner or later so >>> doing it sooner is not a problem IMO. > > DC> Again, I don't see what articles marked with 'E' have to do with the > DC> expunging problem. (I read Lars' reply to my last message, and it > DC> confirmed how I thought things worked.) If I mark an article with E, > DC> and Gnus does a full expunge on the IMAP group, that article will be > DC> fine, since it isn't marked as \Deleted. > > I mentioned this in my bug followup: it used to be marked as \Deleted > and expunged after `gnus-summary-expire-articles-now'. So you are right > about the current behavior but it's not consistent with the prior > behavior. Sorry, but I still don't understand what you mean, and I'm not sure where to look to see your bug followup. Can you explain a scenario in which doing expunge when the user hits `B DEL' will cause other articles to be removed from the IMAP server? a) If I have an article marked `E', and do `B DEL' on another article, my article marked `E' should still be around. I'm not aware of any version of Gnus that would put the \Deleted flag on the `E' article. b) If I run `gnus-summary-expire-articles-now', I would expect that all articles marked with `E' will get removed from the IMAP server (i.e. get marked \Deleted and then expunged). I don't use this much, but the documentation is pretty clear. Has something changed here? And what does this have to do with `B DEL'? As far as I know, Gnus never puts the \Deleted mark on an article without also expunging it, so unless the user uses a different client to do this, running an expunge should be safe. Ted Zlatanov writes: > DC> (But if I'm misunderstanding something, then let me make it clear that I > DC> *don't* think it's fine for articles marked 'E' to be expired early > DC> just because I do `B DEL' on a different article. But I don't think > DC> this will happen.) > > I think so far the votes on that behavior are 2 in favor of "just > expunge," 2 in favor of "do a hack to work around the lack of UIDPLUS," > and 1 (yours) in favor of "don't expunge in that case." If "yours" means me, I don't think that represents my vote, since I don't see how an article marked `E' will be affected by doing `B DEL'. I still vote for always doing an expunge, unless someone explains how that could be a problem. [My server *has* UIDPLUS, so I'm not affected by any of this, but I'd like to clear up my confusion.] Dan