From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/80118 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: message splitting gone haywire Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:55:04 +0800 Message-ID: <87wrcrh2rr.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87ippv2phj.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <877h4rn3ot.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871uuziuzj.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87sjnfjz1h.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317304565 22215 80.91.229.12 (29 Sep 2011 13:56:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:56:05 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M28412@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Sep 29 15:55:57 2011 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 1R9H5g-00036r-5J for ding-account@gmane.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:55:56 +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 1R9H5J-0007Ug-7g; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:55:33 -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 1R9H5H-0007UQ-HC for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:55:31 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1R9H5A-0007DC-LE for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:55:28 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R9H57-0006Cy-Qs for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:55:21 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R9H57-0002qY-0D for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:55:21 +0200 Original-Received: from 50-56-99-223.static.cloud-ips.com ([50.56.99.223]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:55:20 +0200 Original-Received: from eric by 50-56-99-223.static.cloud-ips.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:55:20 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 46 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 50-56-99-223.static.cloud-ips.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:D1nM5XsbnPIhInTgGdkacohp4MM= X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:80118 Archived-At: On Thu, Sep 29 2011, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:00:16 +0800 Eric Abrahamsen wrote: > > EA> Eventually I figured out what was happening -- in the case of a few > EA> regular email threads (newsletters in particular), one earlier issue had > EA> gone into the wrong group, and all subsequent issues went into the same > EA> group. Standard registry behavior, but I had physically moved later > EA> issues into the proper group, and new issues were still getting split > EA> into the wrong group. Eventually I realized that the originally > EA> offending message was still buried back in the wrong group, and once I > EA> rooted out all of them, things went back to normal. > > EA> This happened with two or three separate threads (not sure how), > EA> creating the impression that all hell had broken loose with splitting. > > EA> I'm not sure what proper behavior should be, but I did expect that > EA> split-with-parent would send new messages to the location of the > EA> newest/nearest parent, and not to where some distant ancestor had once > EA> gone. > > Good point. Well, we build the full list of groups, then we call > `gnus-registry-post-process-groups' on it. That looks at > `gnus-registry-split-strategy' which is nil by default; the defcustom > says: > > '(choice :tag "Splitting strategy" > (const :tag "Only use single choices, discard multiple matches" nil) > (const :tag "Majority of matches wins" majority) > (const :tag "First found wins" first)) > > Have you customized this? My guess is you have 'first and the first > group in the list was from the oldest reference. Huh, I set this to 'majority, probably early on when I had no idea how all this actually worked. That would indicate that I must have had more messages in the "wrong" group than in the "right", yes? It sure didn't seem that way at the time, though I could very well have been wrong. Anyway, now that I know how this actually works, it does seem that a 'newest and 'oldest would be handy. Thanks! -- GNU Emacs 23.2.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 2.24.4) of 2011-04-04 on rothera, modified by DebiannNo Gnus v0.18