From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/8687
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Nnml groups, the to-group parameter, and following up to a crosspost
Date: 09 Nov 1996 05:57:14 +0100
Sender: larsi@proletcult.ifi.uio.no
Message-ID: <m220e3hnmd.fsf@proletcult.ifi.uio.no>
References: <m2afsulthj.fsf@deanna.miranova.com> <m2locd8ajd.fsf@proletcult.ifi.uio.no> <m2sp6m79iu.fsf@deanna.miranova.com> <m2d8xp86rx.fsf@proletcult.ifi.uio.no> <m2ohh8tj2y.fsf@deanna.miranova.com> <m2ohh83r4e.fsf@proletcult.ifi.uio.no> <m2k9rwq6of.fsf@deanna.miranova.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035148819 13766 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:20:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:20:19 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <ding-request@ifi.uio.no>
Original-Received: (qmail 6555 invoked from smtpd); 9 Nov 1996 05:04:38 -0000
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@129.240.64.2)
  by deanna.miranova.com with SMTP; 9 Nov 1996 05:04:37 -0000
Original-Received: from proletcult.ifi.uio.no (larsi@ppp11.larris.ifi.uio.no [129.240.68.111]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <FAA10555@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Sat, 9 Nov 1996 05:57:23 +0100
Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by proletcult.ifi.uio.no (8.8.2/8.8.2) id FAA19087; Sat, 9 Nov 1996 05:57:20 +0100
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
In-Reply-To: Steven L Baur's message of 08 Nov 1996 19:38:23 -0800
Original-Lines: 28
X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.58/Emacs 19.34
X-Face: &w!^oO<W.WBH]FsTP:P0f9X6M-ygaADlA_)eF$<UwQzj7:C=Gi<a?/_4$LX^@$Qq7-O&XHp
 lDARi8e8iT<(A$LWAZD*xjk^')/wI5nG;1cNB>~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\<y
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:8687
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:8687

Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com> writes:

> Yes, but it is very different from the patch I submitted, which
> targeted a special case.  Having a to-group parameter set on a mail
> group is not something that can happen by accident -- you have to be
> doing something special with it, and you have to take positive action
> to modify the group parameters.  I don't believe this is anywhere near
> the case in Pine you are referring to.

Yes.  But I still think that `to-group' should be allowed to specify a
single group to send an article to, no matter whether there is a
Newsgroups header in the article or not.  

How about introducing a new group parameter -- `newsgroup'?  If it is
t, then Gnus will use normal news methods for responding to the
message? 

> Lars> The latter is right above the former, isn't it?
> 
> Uuencode and post	S u
> Followup via news	S n
> Followup via news and yank	[unbound]

Yup.  Fix in Red Gnus v0.58.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Ingebrigtsen