feature suggestion, if I can remember it.

feature suggestion, if I can remember it.

[Wes Hardaker]

I thought it would be cool to have user definable group params.  For
instance, you could define the parameter 'my-personal-parameter' to
map to some more regular parameter expression (ie, ((display all)
(dummy (progn run-mucho-stuffo)) ...)).  This way, for users that have
a lot of groups which should be marked similarily, they don't have to
put them all in one topic if they don't want to, but yet its still
easy to add and maintain a common set of group parameters by rolling
your own.  You wouldn't have to change it in every group you were
using to make a change!

Wes

Re: feature suggestion, if I can remember it.

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Wes Hardaker <Wesley.Hardaker@sphys.unil.ch> writes:

> I thought it would be cool to have user definable group params.  For
> instance, you could define the parameter 'my-personal-parameter' to
> map to some more regular parameter expression (ie, ((display all)
> (dummy (progn run-mucho-stuffo)) ...)).  This way, for users that have
> a lot of groups which should be marked similarily, they don't have to
> put them all in one topic if they don't want to, but yet its still
> easy to add and maintain a common set of group parameters by rolling
> your own.  You wouldn't have to change it in every group you were
> using to make a change!

Hm...  Metaparameters.  Is this really necessary now that we have
topic parameters?

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

Re: feature suggestion, if I can remember it.

[Wes Hardaker]

>>>>> On 08 Feb 1997 10:22:41 +0100, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> said:

Wes> I thought it would be cool to have user definable group params.  For
Wes> instance, you could define the parameter 'my-personal-parameter' to
Wes> map to some more regular parameter expression (ie, ((display all)
Wes> (dummy (progn run-mucho-stuffo)) ...)).  This way, for users that have
Wes> a lot of groups which should be marked similarily, they don't have to
Wes> put them all in one topic if they don't want to, but yet its still
Wes> easy to add and maintain a common set of group parameters by rolling
Wes> your own.  You wouldn't have to change it in every group you were
Wes> using to make a change!

Lars> Hm...  Metaparameters.  Is this really necessary now that we have
Lars> topic parameters?

Yes!  Re-read the above, as I said its possible you want all of one
set of groups to have a specific set of parameters, but they are all
members of topics related to the subject type, not how you want to be
reading them.  For instance, I want to sort my snmp related groups
into one topic, because they are all related subject wise.  However, I
want to treat them like my inbox because I'm the mailing list
maintainer of 2 of the 3 mailing lists and I need to make sure they
are answered properly if no one else takes the questions.  My inbox
has a *huge* set of parameters, which I don't want to copy to each
group every time I make a change.  Currently I have all these groups
in an inbox topic, because I *can't* sort them by subject without
copying parameters so I sort by type, which I consider to be more
important in this case.

I think this would fix up the 'undefined' comment in the topic
discussion in the manual (ie, a group is listed in two topics).  tell
them they can create their own parameters if they want to always apply
a parameter to multiple groups.

Ok, I'm done typing...

(this should be fairly easy shouldn't it?)
Wes

Re: feature suggestion, if I can remember it.

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Wes Hardaker <Wesley.Hardaker@sphys.unil.ch> writes:

> Currently I have all these groups in an inbox topic, because I
> *can't* sort them by subject without copying parameters so I sort by
> type, which I consider to be more important in this case.

Ok; I've added this to the todo list.

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