From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/20109 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lloyd Zusman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Marking as already read when using gcc-self? Date: 05 Jan 1999 18:45:21 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <8690fj75et.fsf@slowfox.cs.uni-dortmund.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035158462 16034 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:01:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA09511 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 18:48:36 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAB15560; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 17:48:14 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Tue, 05 Jan 1999 17:46:06 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA08040 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 17:45:54 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from ljz.asfast.net (gnus@ljz.asfast.net [205.230.75.82]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA05754 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 18:45:42 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from gnus@localhost) by ljz.asfast.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA29316; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 18:45:22 -0500 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: "!ga1s|?LNLE3MeeeEYs(%LIl9q[xV9!j4#xf4!**BFW_ihlOb;:Slb>)vy>CJM writes: > Justin Sheehy writes: > > > Lloyd Zusman writes: > > > > > Then, when entering summary mode, some routine (which one? ... well, > > > I'll dig around and find it if no one can make a suggestion) could > > > then recognize this `X-Gnus-Gcc-Action' header and perform the > > > specified action. > > > > Hm. > > > > So, one could send me mail with a X-Gnus-Gcc-Action: > > header and make Gnus do something for me when it processes that > > mail? > > > > I don't think I'd like that very much. > > Why not? I think it's be totally hip -- see the headers. :-) Sure ... why not! Might as well allow any and all sexp's that appear data portion of that header to be evaluated, instead of just interpreting a few specific actions. :) But yes, I agree with all of you who pointed out that even with a few specific action keywords, the header is indeed a bad idea, given the fact that anyone could send a message with that header already defined. Hmmm ... OK. What about this idea: Create a new group parameter, perhaps called `gcc-action'. It can take only a few specified values such as 'tick, 'mark-read, etc. See to it that `gnus-inews-do-gcc' in `gnus-msg.el' has access to the value of `gcc-action' for the given group (I have to look more closely at the code to determine the details as to how to get that value into `gnus-inews-do-gcc', but I'm certain that this can be done). If this `gcc-action' value is present, pass it as a new parameter to the invocation of `gnus-request-accept-article' near the end of this routine. Then, add another optional argument called `action' to the function `gnus-request-accept-article' in `gnus-int.el'. If this optional argument is `nil', then this function will behave as it currently does. However, if `action' is set to one of the possible values of `gcc-action', then tick or mark the article accordingly after the `funcall' at the end of `gnus-request-accept-article' returns (the article number of the new article should be contained within the return value of this funcall, and this plus the group name should allow us to set the appropriate ticking or marking flags). Any comments? -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com