From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu (mx1.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.32]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC32524A80 for ; Wed, 22 May 2024 00:47:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.208]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1s9YGz-0000000H13a-2DUa for ml@inbox.vuxu.org; Tue, 21 May 2024 17:47:57 -0500 Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1s9YGz-00000004hWx-0zKO for ml@inbox.vuxu.org; Tue, 21 May 2024 17:47:57 -0500 Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1s9YGr-00000004hWo-1Vzn for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 21 May 2024 17:47:54 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1s9YGi-00000006y6I-1aGK for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 21 May 2024 17:47:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Message-ID:Date:Subject:From:To: Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=yhrjJFqSSiGcq9VaxEZTBw5fFnpbB6IKMIExNuhX4J4=; b=Md15jTKJsMVAqNx231hSqG94sw cKUxQkenxmZbbql5CaLZ2UXVu3FGGHWSw50YFkgSUVdvQ2HtTn3xZU0uBxVC7fiWYg7jge3ldXFw0 RgCMakQYFby4aZ/tgFH3EgzQasIjtT0HRL+XK6zdFjjJIQC+nfFrpxM8mcF+CrSx0c1Q=; Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1s9YGa-0004VK-2V for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 22 May 2024 00:47:35 +0200 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1s9YGY-0004j9-Gq for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 22 May 2024 00:47:30 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ding@gnus.org From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Updating definition of "bogus" groups? Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 15:47:19 -0700 Message-ID: <87zfsi9408.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:wqxFV9QeLoVHZq8RjjL1hisSZDI= List-ID: Precedence: bulk Hi all, In bug#60078[1], there's some discussion about Gnus's check-bogus-group functions and whether they're buggy, or what exactly they're supposed to do, and eventually what "bogus" actually means. Near as I can tell, "bogus" once upon a time meant something very specific in the Usenet world, but that was 20+ years ago, and it's no longer a term of art. If you look at `gnus-check-bogus-newsgroups', the 20-year-old code that determines if a newsgroup is bogus is: (unless (or (gnus-active group) ; Active (and (gnus-info-method info) (not (gnus-secondary-method-p (gnus-info-method info))))) ; Foreign ;; Found a bogus newsgroup. (push group bogus)) So if a group is active, or if it belongs to a method that isn't a secondary method, then it isn't bogus. That seems like an odd and arbitrary criteria for weeding out groups. Based on what I think "bogus" once meant (just that a newsgroup is being superseded, or otherwise discouraged, and dropped from servers' lists), it seems like a more reasonable update of the intention would be: A group is bogus if it belongs to a select method that has a `gnus-request-list' function, but the group itself doesn't appear in the list. This seems like it would be more handy for cleaning up "dangling" groups. Does anyone have an opinion on that idea, one way or the other? Thanks! Eric [1]: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=60078