* Completely removing an article from drafts? @ 2003-05-12 9:32 Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 10:27 ` Jochen Küpper 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) How to I completely remove an article from my drafts folder? In the old days before I started using gnus-agent (i.e., up until two days ago), I had a home-grown way of completely expunging articles from any group. I used one function I wrote to mark the articles in a certain way (I forget exactly which marks I used, since I wrote this code eons ago), and then had another function which would completely expunge all articles marked in this way when I leave the group. But now that I'm using gnus-agent, the marks are different and my functions no longer work. Rather than change my functions (which are pretty much hacks), I'd rather remove articles from my drafts folder in the "proper" way, whatever that is. Thanks in advance. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 9:32 Completely removing an article from drafts? Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 10:27 ` Jochen Küpper 2003-05-12 10:59 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 11:57 ` Simon Josefsson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Jochen Küpper @ 2003-05-12 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 471 bytes --] On Mon, 12 May 2003 05:32:49 -0400 Lloyd Zusman wrote: Lloyd> How to I completely remove an article from my drafts folder? I use ,---- | B DEL gnus-summary-delete-article `---- (Although I still have problems with it in nnimap groups...) Greetings, Jochen -- Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit http://www.Jochen-Kuepper.de Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité GnuPG key: CC1B0B4D Sex, drugs and rock-n-roll [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 10:27 ` Jochen Küpper @ 2003-05-12 10:59 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 11:20 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 11:57 ` Simon Josefsson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw) "Jochen Küpper" <jochen@jochen-kuepper.de> writes: > On Mon, 12 May 2003 05:32:49 -0400 Lloyd Zusman wrote: > > Lloyd> How to I completely remove an article from my drafts folder? > > I use > ,---- > | B DEL gnus-summary-delete-article > `---- > > (Although I still have problems with it in nnimap groups...) Yep. That worked. I was looking for functions with the name 'expunge' in them. IMHO '-delete-' is misleading as part of this function's name. Thanks for your help. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 10:59 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 11:20 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 12:03 ` Lloyd Zusman 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > Yep. That worked. I was looking for functions with the name 'expunge' > in them. IMHO '-delete-' is misleading as part of this function's name. Why? How is "remove an article" (your request) less represented by "delete" than by "expunge"? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 11:20 ` Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 12:03 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:23 ` Karl Kleinpaste 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:03 UTC (permalink / raw) Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes: > Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >> Yep. That worked. I was looking for functions with the name 'expunge' >> in them. IMHO '-delete-' is misleading as part of this function's name. > > Why? > > How is "remove an article" (your request) less represented by "delete" > than by "expunge"? First of all, I meant to type "expire" instead of "expunge" (I have been in the IMAP world a lot lately). As for why I don't like "delete" in the function name, most (all?) of the other 'delete' functions simply put a mark on the article and don't actually get rid of it. The removal itself is handled later on via expiry. Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name. Of course, this proposed `gnus-summary-expire-article' function would have to simply be an aliaas for `gnus-summary-delete-article', so as not to break existing code. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:03 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:23 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:57 ` Lloyd Zusman 0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think > that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name. No, I don't agree. "Expiry" in Gnus is generally a time-based concept; an article expires after a timeout passes, causing deletion. gnus-summary-delete-article simply deletes, right now. It does not expire anything; it annihilates something on the spot. For "delete," dictionary.reference.com says "To remove by striking out or canceling", and that's what the function does. I think it is named exactly right. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:23 ` Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:59 ` Karl Kleinpaste ` (2 more replies) 2003-05-12 12:57 ` Lloyd Zusman 1 sibling, 3 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:47 UTC (permalink / raw) Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes: > Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >> Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think >> that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name. > > No, I don't agree. "Expiry" in Gnus is generally a time-based > concept; an article expires after a timeout passes, causing deletion. > > gnus-summary-delete-article simply deletes, right now. It does not > expire anything; it annihilates something on the spot. For "delete," > dictionary.reference.com says "To remove by striking out or > canceling", and that's what the function does. > > I think it is named exactly right. If we are to adhere to that dictionary definition, then the other functions with "delete" in their names should then have a name change. They should then contain the string "mark-for-deletion" or some such thing, since those functions do not delete articles in the way that the dictionary specifies. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:59 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 13:11 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:18 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-14 19:53 ` Kai Großjohann 2 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > They should then contain the string "mark-for-deletion" or some such > thing, since those functions do not delete articles in the way that the > dictionary specifies. I'm having a hard time finding even one example of a Gnus function named with "delete" which _doesn't_ delete something on the spot. b gnus-article-delete-invisible-text - Delete all invisible text in the current buffer. b gnus-article-delete-text-of-type - Delete text of TYPE in the current buffer. b gnus-async-delete-prefetched-entry - Delete ENTRY from buffer and alist. b gnus-cite-delete-overlays gnus-delete-alist - Delete by side effect any elements of ALIST whose car is `eq' to KEY. b gnus-delete-file - Delete FILE if it exists. b gnus-delete-first - Delete by side effect the first occurrence of ELT as a member of LIST. b gnus-delete-images - Delete all images in CATEGORY. m gnus-delete-line gnus-delete-overlay - Remove EXTENT from its buffer and destroy it. b gnus-delete-wash-type - Add a washing of TYPE to the current status. b gnus-delete-windows-in-gnusey-frames - Do a `delete-other-windows' in all frames that have Gnus windows. b gnus-dribble-delete-file b* gnus-group-delete-group - Delete the current group. Only meaningful with editable groups. b* gnus-group-delete-groups - Delete the current group. Only meaningful with editable groups. b* gnus-mime-delete-part - Delete the MIME part under point. b gnus-request-delete-group b* gnus-summary-delete-article - Delete the N next (mail) articles. * gnus-summary-delete-marked-as-read - Limit the summary buffer to articles that are not marked as read. * gnus-summary-delete-marked-with - Exclude articles that are marked with MARKS (e.g. "DK"). b* gnus-topic-delete - Delete a topic. a gnus-uu-delete-work-dir ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:59 ` Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 13:11 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:37 ` Karl Kleinpaste 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw) You're right, except for `gnus-summary-delete-article', `gnus-summary-delete-marked-as-read', and `gnus-summary-delete-marked-wuth'. The first one does what `nnmail-expiry-function' tells it to do. As I mentioned in my other message, that means that these functions do NOT do a dictionary "delete" unless `nnmail-expiry-function' is set to 'delete. The second two simply limit what's shown in the summary buffer to those articles that are unread, or accordingly marked, without actually removing anything. Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes: > Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >> They should then contain the string "mark-for-deletion" or some such >> thing, since those functions do not delete articles in the way that the >> dictionary specifies. > > I'm having a hard time finding even one example of a Gnus function > named with "delete" which _doesn't_ delete something on the spot. > > b gnus-article-delete-invisible-text - Delete all invisible text in the current buffer. > b gnus-article-delete-text-of-type - Delete text of TYPE in the current buffer. > b gnus-async-delete-prefetched-entry - Delete ENTRY from buffer and alist. > b gnus-cite-delete-overlays > gnus-delete-alist - Delete by side effect any elements of ALIST whose car is `eq' to KEY. > b gnus-delete-file - Delete FILE if it exists. > b gnus-delete-first - Delete by side effect the first occurrence of ELT as a member of LIST. > b gnus-delete-images - Delete all images in CATEGORY. > m gnus-delete-line > gnus-delete-overlay - Remove EXTENT from its buffer and destroy it. > b gnus-delete-wash-type - Add a washing of TYPE to the current status. > b gnus-delete-windows-in-gnusey-frames - Do a `delete-other-windows' in all frames that have Gnus windows. > b gnus-dribble-delete-file > b* gnus-group-delete-group - Delete the current group. Only meaningful with editable groups. > b* gnus-group-delete-groups - Delete the current group. Only meaningful with editable groups. > b* gnus-mime-delete-part - Delete the MIME part under point. > b gnus-request-delete-group > b* gnus-summary-delete-article - Delete the N next (mail) articles. > * gnus-summary-delete-marked-as-read - Limit the summary buffer to articles that are not marked as read. > * gnus-summary-delete-marked-with - Exclude articles that are marked with MARKS (e.g. "DK"). > b* gnus-topic-delete - Delete a topic. > a gnus-uu-delete-work-dir -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 13:11 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 13:37 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 14:29 ` Lloyd Zusman 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > You're right, except for `gnus-summary-delete-article', > `gnus-summary-delete-marked-as-read', and > `gnus-summary-delete-marked-with'. > The first one does what `nnmail-expiry-function' tells it to do. No, not merely so. The code near the top of -delete-article has forced nnmail-expiry-target to 'delete since we had this argument some months back. (See archives, subject "B DEL being treated as expiry?") See today's gnus-sum.el, line 9235. The doc string is reflective of this. And that was merely to re-assert the previous always-deleting behavior of -delete-article anyway, following another change which broke this longstanding behavior. > The second two simply limit what's shown in the summary buffer to > those articles that are unread, or accordingly marked, without actually > removing anything. In the 1st place, if you will check the documentation, you will find that these are aliases: -as-read: Obsolete; use `gnus-summary-limit-to-unread' instead. -with: Obsolete; use `gnus-summary-limit-exclude-marks' instead. And in the 2nd place, what those functions do, native or aliased, is to DELETE things from the summary buffer, as advertised. They were merely renamed (and left as aliases) because they fit better conceptually into the general "limit" scheme. > Also, I want to add that `gnus-summary-delete-article' does not delete > an article using the dictionary definition of "delete" that you mention > above. Check the documentation and the source code. What that function > actually does is to expire the article, in the exact manner that Gnus > defines "expire". Lloyd, all this started out as, for me, was curiosity as to why you think "delete" doesn't mean "delete." That's all. I wasn't intending to get anyone's shorts in a knot over it. I did check the source; you should do the same; look again at nnmail-expiry-target. And the doc string on -delete-article says: Delete the N next (mail) articles. This command actually deletes articles. This is not a marking command. The article will disappear forever from your life, never to return. Enough already. Delete means delete. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 13:37 ` Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 14:29 ` Lloyd Zusman 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 14:29 UTC (permalink / raw) > Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >> You're right, except for `gnus-summary-delete-article', >> `gnus-summary-delete-marked-as-read', and >> `gnus-summary-delete-marked-with'. > >> The first one does what `nnmail-expiry-function' tells it to do. > > No, not merely so. The code near the top of -delete-article has > forced nnmail-expiry-target to 'delete since we had this argument some > months back. (See archives, subject "B DEL being treated as expiry?") > See today's gnus-sum.el, line 9235. The doc string is reflective of > this. And that was merely to re-assert the previous always-deleting > behavior of -delete-article anyway, following another change which > broke this longstanding behavior. Ah ... I missed that 'delete argument. >> The second two simply limit what's shown in the summary buffer to >> those articles that are unread, or accordingly marked, without actually >> removing anything. > > In the 1st place, if you will check the documentation, you will find > that these are aliases: > > -as-read: Obsolete; use `gnus-summary-limit-to-unread' instead. > -with: Obsolete; use `gnus-summary-limit-exclude-marks' instead. > > And in the 2nd place, what those functions do, native or aliased, is > to DELETE things from the summary buffer, as advertised. They were > merely renamed (and left as aliases) because they fit better > conceptually into the general "limit" scheme. I had misunderstood `make-obsolete', so yes, I am in agreement. > Lloyd, all this started out as, for me, was curiosity as to why you > think "delete" doesn't mean "delete." That's all. I wasn't intending > to get anyone's shorts in a knot over it. > > I did check the source; you should do the same; look again at > nnmail-expiry-target. And the doc string on -delete-article says: > > Delete the N next (mail) articles. > This command actually deletes articles. This is not a marking > command. The article will disappear forever from your life, never to > return. > > Enough already. Delete means delete. The doc string didn't seem to correspond to what I thought the function actually did, because I overlooked the 'delete argument that you mentioned above. So yes, they all do a real "delete". Shorts are duly unknotted. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:59 ` Karl Kleinpaste @ 2003-05-12 13:18 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-14 19:55 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-14 19:53 ` Kai Großjohann 2 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes: > >> Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >>> Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think >>> that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name. >> >> No, I don't agree. "Expiry" in Gnus is generally a time-based >> concept; an article expires after a timeout passes, causing deletion. >> >> gnus-summary-delete-article simply deletes, right now. It does not >> expire anything; it annihilates something on the spot. For "delete," >> dictionary.reference.com says "To remove by striking out or >> canceling", and that's what the function does. >> >> I think it is named exactly right. > > If we are to adhere to that dictionary definition, then the other > functions with "delete" in their names should then have a name change. > They should then contain the string "mark-for-deletion" or some such > thing, since those functions do not delete articles in the way that the > dictionary specifies. Also, I want to add that `gnus-summary-delete-article' does not delete an article using the dictionary definition of "delete" that you mention above. Check the documentation and the source code. What that function actually does is to expire the article, in the exact manner that Gnus defines "expire". What `gnus-summary-delete-article' actually does is to apply `nnimap-expiry-function' to the article. If `nnimap-expiry-function' is set to 'delete, then `gnus-summary-delete-article' will indeed do a deletion as the expiry process that it performs. However, if that variable contains a function symbol, that function is invoked to perform the expiry. Therefore, `gnus-summary-delete-article' is indeed a misnomer for this function, and `gnus-summary-expire-article' is the perfectly precise name for what this function actually does. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 13:18 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-14 19:55 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-10-18 13:48 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-14 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > Also, I want to add that `gnus-summary-delete-article' does not delete > an article using the dictionary definition of "delete" that you mention > above. Check the documentation and the source code. What that function > actually does is to expire the article, in the exact manner that Gnus > defines "expire". Ayee. This has been discussed before. I think you're right. `B DEL' should always delete the article, even if nnmail-expiry-target is something other than delete. But I think that the Gnus Towers had a different opinion, or something. Who remembers more? -- This line is not blank. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-14 19:55 ` Kai Großjohann @ 2003-10-18 13:48 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2003-10-18 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw) kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann) writes: > Ayee. This has been discussed before. I think you're right. `B > DEL' should always delete the article, even if nnmail-expiry-target > is something other than delete. > > But I think that the Gnus Towers had a different opinion, or > something. Who remembers more? I think `B DEL' should always actually delete articles. It doesn't if you've set expiry-target to something funky? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:59 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 13:18 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-14 19:53 ` Kai Großjohann 2 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-14 19:53 UTC (permalink / raw) Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > If we are to adhere to that dictionary definition, then the other > functions with "delete" in their names should then have a name change. Which other functions with "delete" in their names? (I looked and couldn't find any relevant ones. Probably I'm having a blonde day.) -- This line is not blank. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:23 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:57 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 16:27 ` Lloyd Zusman 1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw) Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes: > Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >> Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think >> that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name. > > No, I don't agree. "Expiry" in Gnus is generally a time-based > concept; an article expires after a timeout passes, causing deletion. > > gnus-summary-delete-article simply deletes, right now. It does not > expire anything; it annihilates something on the spot. For "delete," > dictionary.reference.com says "To remove by striking out or > canceling", and that's what the function does. > > I think it is named exactly right. In addition to what I wrote in my previous message, I want to add that `gnus-summary-delete-article' does _not_ delete an article using the dictionary definition of "delete" that you mention above. Check the documentation and the source code. What that function actually does is to _expire_ the article, in the exact manner that Gnus defines _expire_. What `gnus-summary-delete-article' actually does is to apply `nnimap-expiry-function' to the article. If `nnimap-expiry-function' is set to 'delete, then `gnus-summary-delete-article' will indeed do a deletion as the expiry process that it performs. However, if that variable contains a function symbol, that function is invoked to perform the expiry. Therefore, `gnus-summary-delete-article' is indeed a misnomer for this function, and `gnus-summary-expire-article' is the perfectly precise name for what this function actually does. -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 12:57 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 16:27 ` Lloyd Zusman 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw) This message was delayed by the mailing-list server and posted now. Therefore, the items mentioned here have already been discussed, and are no longer relevant. Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: > Karl Kleinpaste <k@charcoal.com> writes: > >> Lloyd Zusman <ljz@asfast.com> writes: >>> Since `gnus-summary-delete-article' does actual expiry, I think >>> that it would be more clear if "expire" appeared in the function name. >> >> No, I don't agree. "Expiry" in Gnus is generally a time-based >> concept; an article expires after a timeout passes, causing deletion. >> >> gnus-summary-delete-article simply deletes, right now. It does not >> expire anything; it annihilates something on the spot. For "delete," >> dictionary.reference.com says "To remove by striking out or >> canceling", and that's what the function does. >> >> I think it is named exactly right. > > In addition to what I wrote in my previous message, I want to add that > `gnus-summary-delete-article' does _not_ delete an article using the > dictionary definition of "delete" that you mention above. Check the > documentation and the source code. What that function actually does is > to _expire_ the article, in the exact manner that Gnus defines _expire_. > > What `gnus-summary-delete-article' actually does is to apply > `nnimap-expiry-function' to the article. If `nnimap-expiry-function' is > set to 'delete, then `gnus-summary-delete-article' will indeed do a > deletion as the expiry process that it performs. However, if that > variable contains a function symbol, that function is invoked to perform > the expiry. > > Therefore, `gnus-summary-delete-article' is indeed a misnomer for this > function, and `gnus-summary-expire-article' is the perfectly precise > name for what this function actually does. > > -- > Lloyd Zusman > ljz@asfast.com -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 10:27 ` Jochen Küpper 2003-05-12 10:59 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 11:57 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-12 12:12 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:45 ` Jochen Küpper 1 sibling, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-12 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Jochen Küpper <jochen@jochen-kuepper.de> writes: [B-DEL] > (Although I still have problems with it in nnimap groups...) What was those? Perhaps they are related to what Niklas Morberg was seeing. Do you still see them in current CVS? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 11:57 ` Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-12 12:12 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:45 ` Jochen Küpper 1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > Jochen Küpper <jochen@jochen-kuepper.de> writes: > > [B-DEL] >> (Although I still have problems with it in nnimap groups...) > > What was those? Perhaps they are related to what Niklas Morberg was > seeing. Do you still see them in current CVS? FWIW, I ran that function inside of one of my agentized nnimap groups, and it worked just fine: the article was properly expired. Maybe this is a problem when the nnimap group is not agentized? -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 11:57 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-12 12:12 ` Lloyd Zusman @ 2003-05-12 13:45 ` Jochen Küpper 2003-05-12 18:32 ` David S Goldberg 1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Jochen Küpper @ 2003-05-12 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1061 bytes --] On Mon, 12 May 2003 13:57:37 +0200 Simon Josefsson wrote: Simon> Jochen Küpper <jochen=W2i0oK7yYu0+t3nig+EZI7NAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org> writes: Simon> [B-DEL] >> (Although I still have problems with it in nnimap groups...) Simon> What was those? Perhaps they are related to what Niklas Morberg Simon> was seeing. Do you still see them in current CVS? I was referring to ,---- | Message-ID: <86k7eq402b.fsf=bhz6AtcEt9J/F1eftIH1yA@public.gmane.org> `---- and references therein. It seems to work just fine with latest cvs. Sorry for the line noise. I do have a few old messages which forget their expiry marks whenever I try to get rid of them and which I also cannot delete (B DEL), but I (strongly) assume this is a server problem. (Related to the admin moving messages form one server to another after an upgrade...) Greetings, Jochen -- Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit http://www.Jochen-Kuepper.de Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité GnuPG key: CC1B0B4D Sex, drugs and rock-n-roll [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: Completely removing an article from drafts? 2003-05-12 13:45 ` Jochen Küpper @ 2003-05-12 18:32 ` David S Goldberg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: David S Goldberg @ 2003-05-12 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> On Mon, 12 May 2003 15:45:41 +0200, Jochen Küpper >>>>> <jochen@jochen-kuepper.de> said: > I do have a few old messages which forget their expiry marks whenever > I try to get rid of them and which I also cannot delete (B DEL), but I > (strongly) assume this is a server problem. (Related to the admin > moving messages form one server to another after an upgrade...) Could they be in the agent, but not on the server? Although expiry seems to do the right thing for me agentwise now (articles in the agent are deleted from the agent when expiry deletes them from the server) I recently found a whole slew of really ancient (well several months anyway :-) articles in the agent which B DEL would not get rid of because there was no such article on the server. Running gns-agent-expire from the group buffer got rid of them for me. -- Dave Goldberg david.goldberg6@verizon.net ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-18 13:48 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-05-12 9:32 Completely removing an article from drafts? Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 10:27 ` Jochen Küpper 2003-05-12 10:59 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 11:20 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 12:03 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:23 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 12:47 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 12:59 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 13:11 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:37 ` Karl Kleinpaste 2003-05-12 14:29 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:18 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-14 19:55 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-10-18 13:48 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2003-05-14 19:53 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-12 12:57 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 16:27 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 11:57 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-12 12:12 ` Lloyd Zusman 2003-05-12 13:45 ` Jochen Küpper 2003-05-12 18:32 ` David S Goldberg
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).