* Overbearing undownloaded face @ 2003-05-02 1:49 Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 1:54 ` Henrik Enberg 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 1:49 UTC (permalink / raw) I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of running plugged only. The current setup with undownloaded face seems to overpower other long standing faces and options. When messages come in, they seem to receive a dull grey face (normal-undownloaded) and unless one actuall downloads the message it is not possible to change that face with other actions that normally would change a message face. Things like ticked, domant, read etc have no effect on this overpowering face. That might make some sense if the user had true predicate in all groups and never needed to keep track of undownloaded but read or ticked but undownloaded or any number of other possibilities, one might encounter while online. I haven't noticed any complaints about this so am wondering if it might be some screw up in my local settings. Just at a quick thought, it seems the undownloaded face is more a pain in the butt than a help. Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way? If the latter how would I override or disable this behavior? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 1:49 Overbearing undownloaded face Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 1:54 ` Henrik Enberg 2003-05-02 2:37 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Henrik Enberg @ 2003-05-02 1:54 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way? If the > latter how would I override or disable this behavior? Customize gnus-summary-{low,high}-undownloaded-face. I agree that the default is a bit overwhelming. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 1:54 ` Henrik Enberg @ 2003-05-02 2:37 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 4:01 ` Kevin Greiner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 2:37 UTC (permalink / raw) Henrik Enberg <henrik@enberg.org> writes: > Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > >> Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way? If the >> latter how would I override or disable this behavior? > > Customize gnus-summary-{low,high}-undownloaded-face. I agree that the > default is a bit overwhelming. Maybe I'm not following you here. But first what determines a high interest undownloaded or low interest undownloaded? Does it involve scoring? (I don't use scoring) I did customize the normal-undownloaded but that has no bearing on the real problem. That is, the faces associated with other marks are not possible unless the article is downloaded. (read, ticked etc) Does customizing low high somehow affect that problem?. Are you able to mark undownloaded messages as read, ticked, dormant etc and see a face change? Many of the groups under my agentized server are in default category which I have predicated to false. I don't want to download them but do want to read them online (plugged) and be allowed to have faces associated with read, ticked, dormant etc be used. The fact that the group is under an agentized server shouldn't break those faces. What I see is that in those default (false) category groups messages will never be downloaded so all the normal gnus faces for read, ticked etc are useless. Surely this is not the intent of the overpowering undownloaded face? We used to be able to have groups only read online coexist with agentized groups and have no face conflict. Now it appears that will only work if the groups are on different servers, one agentize the other not. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 2:37 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 4:01 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 5:37 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 23:12 ` Harry Putnam 0 siblings, 2 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-02 4:01 UTC (permalink / raw) Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of > running plugged only. The current setup with undownloaded face seems > to overpower other long standing faces and options. > > When messages come in, they seem to receive a dull grey face > (normal-undownloaded) and unless one actuall downloads the message it > is not possible to change that face with other actions that normally > would change a message face. Things like ticked, domant, read etc > have no effect on this overpowering face. Well, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Several colors were tried before the group tired of seeing it changed or decided that they liked the green. To be honest, I'm not sure which. > That might make some sense if the user had true predicate in all > groups and never needed to keep track of undownloaded but read or > ticked but undownloaded or any number of other possibilities, one > might encounter while online. > > I haven't noticed any complaints about this so am wondering if it > might be some screw up in my local settings. > > Just at a quick thought, it seems the undownloaded face is more a > pain in the butt than a help. The agent isn't much use if you haven't downloaded an article. If you use gnus-agent-fetch-session (J s) then the undownloaded face may not be much of a help. However, if you like to pick and choose the articles to download, it helps with keeping track of your decisions. > Henrik Enberg <henrik@enberg.org> writes: > >> Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: >> >>> Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way? If the >>> latter how would I override or disable this behavior? >> >> Customize gnus-summary-{low,high}-undownloaded-face. I agree that the >> default is a bit overwhelming. That will change the color. If you want to completely remove the undownloaded face (and thereby restore the behavior that you're comfortable with), do the following. Customize gnus-summary-highlight. Remove the three cons cells that reference the undownloaded faces. If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to gnus-summary-format-spec. > Maybe I'm not following you here. But first what determines a high > interest undownloaded or low interest undownloaded? Does it involve > scoring? (I don't use scoring) It uses scoring. > I did customize the normal-undownloaded but that has no bearing on the > real problem. That is, the faces associated with other marks are not > possible unless the article is downloaded. (read, ticked etc) The agent was largely designed from the perspective of the nntp backend. Since the retention times on many servers is fairly low, it really not safe to mark an article then expect it to still be available later. However, if you fetch it into the agent, you can then mark it knowing that it will always be available. > Does customizing low high somehow affect that problem?. > Are you able to mark undownloaded messages as read, ticked, dormant > etc and see a face change? > > Many of the groups under my agentized server are in default category > which I have predicated to false. I don't want to download them but > do want to read them online (plugged) and be allowed to have faces > associated with read, ticked, dormant etc be used. The fact that the > group is under an agentized server shouldn't break those faces. > > What I see is that in those default (false) category groups messages > will never be downloaded so all the normal gnus faces for read, > ticked etc are useless. Actually, 'never' is a little misleading. All that you've done is told Gnus that you don't want it to automatically fetch articles into the agent. The default category will not prevent you from using a much more sophisticated selection tool, your mind, to fetch interesting articles into the agent. > Surely this is not the intent of the > overpowering undownloaded face? We used to be able to have groups > only read online coexist with agentized groups and have no face > conflict. Now it appears that will only work if the groups are on > different servers, one agentize the other not. No, everything is customizable to the point that you can get back the exact non-agentized appearance. Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 4:01 ` Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-02 5:37 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 23:12 ` Harry Putnam 1 sibling, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 5:37 UTC (permalink / raw) Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > Well, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Several colors were tried > before the group tired of seeing it changed or decided that they liked > the green. To be honest, I'm not sure which. The actual color was never my complaint [...] >> Just at a quick thought, it seems the undownloaded face is more a >> pain in the butt than a help. > > The agent isn't much use if you haven't downloaded an article. If you > use gnus-agent-fetch-session (J s) then the undownloaded face may not > be much of a help. However, if you like to pick and choose the > articles to download, it helps with keeping track of your decisions. I see the idea of the undownloaded face. But it seems to be intruding in an area where agent qualities are not called for. Its over-riding long time functionality developed before there was an agent. Nulling out options designed for news reading without the agent. Like different faces for read, dormant etc. Those options (or at least their faces) shouldn't disappear because the server is agentized. > That will change the color. If you want to completely remove the > undownloaded face (and thereby restore the behavior that you're > comfortable with), do the following. > > Customize gnus-summary-highlight. Remove the three cons cells that > reference the undownloaded faces. Ok, now were talking. > If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to > gnus-summary-format-spec. I'm thinking using format-spec should be the default. It wouldn't over-ride existing faces or options for other styles of reading > The agent was largely designed from the perspective of the nntp > backend. Since the retention times on many servers is fairly low, it > really not safe to mark an article then expect it to still be > available later. However, if you fetch it into the agent, you can > then mark it knowing that it will always be available. Those very marks, and their faces were invented for precisely the usage you say is unsafe. Tick, dormant, read all were available long before the agent came into being ..(around quassia-18 or so, I think). The whole business of tieing tick to cache was around before the agent. But it wasn't felt necessary to force all other faces into submission if a message was not cached. [...] > No, everything is customizable to the point that you can get back the > exact non-agentized appearance. Thats the beauty of gnus eh? But still, it seems that undownloaded face thing makes it hard to use the agent as it was designed to be used. That is, to allow both styles of reading in one tool. Plugged and unplugged. In the current setup, features that are, strickly speaking, only relevant to agentized messages are getting into the way of `plugged' usage by overriding marks and their faces - in fact, rendering them useless for Plugged reading. Thanks for the info and aiming me at those three cons-cells. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 4:01 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 5:37 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-04 23:12 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 14:19 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-05 14:50 ` Kai Großjohann 1 sibling, 2 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-04 23:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > Customize gnus-summary-highlight. Remove the three cons cells that > reference the undownloaded faces. > > If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to > gnus-summary-format-spec. Kevin, can you elaborate on the text indicator proceedure. You are talking about some thing that will appear in the summary format that will indicate downloadedness right? How might that be done? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:12 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-05 14:19 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-05 14:50 ` Kai Großjohann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-05 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw) Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > >> Customize gnus-summary-highlight. Remove the three cons cells that >> reference the undownloaded faces. >> >> If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to >> gnus-summary-format-spec. > > Kevin, can you elaborate on the text indicator proceedure. You are > talking about some thing that will appear in the summary format that > will indicate downloadedness right? > > How might that be done? Sorry, mistyped the variable name. What you want is gnus-summary-line-format. Enter c-h v gnus-summary-line-format You'll get a buffer listing all of the format specifiers that can be placed in the spec. At the bottom of the buffer, you'll have a customized button which will let you edit gnus-summary-line-format. The %O specifier is a fixed width (1 char) field. It's value will be '+' when the article has been downloaded, '-' when the article is undownloaded, and ' ' when the server is not agentized. If you don't like the +/- characters, you can customize gnus-downloaded-mark/gnus-undownloaded-mark to use different characters. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:12 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 14:19 ` Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-05 14:50 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-06 16:37 ` Kai Großjohann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-05 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw) Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > >> Customize gnus-summary-highlight. Remove the three cons cells that >> reference the undownloaded faces. >> >> If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to >> gnus-summary-format-spec. > > Kevin, can you elaborate on the text indicator proceedure. You are > talking about some thing that will appear in the summary format that > will indicate downloadedness right? > > How might that be done? As he said, add %O to gnus-summary-line-format. -- file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-05 14:50 ` Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-06 16:37 ` Kai Großjohann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-06 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw) kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann) writes: > As he said, add %O to gnus-summary-line-format. Oh, he said gnus-summary-highlight. Sorry. -- file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 1:49 Overbearing undownloaded face Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 1:54 ` Henrik Enberg @ 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-02 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of > running plugged only. The current setup with undownloaded face seems > to overpower other long standing faces and options. Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black marks on unread messages. I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? --- gnus-sum.el.~6.342.~ Tue Apr 29 02:44:20 2003 +++ gnus-sum.el Fri May 2 14:16:54 2003 @@ -902,12 +902,6 @@ (defcustom gnus-summary-highlight '(((eq mark gnus-canceled-mark) . gnus-summary-cancelled-face) - ((and uncached (> score default-high)) - . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face) - ((and uncached (< score default-low)) - . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face) - (uncached - . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face) ((and (> score default-high) (or (eq mark gnus-dormant-mark) (eq mark gnus-ticked-mark))) @@ -935,6 +929,12 @@ . gnus-summary-high-read-face) ((< score default-low) . gnus-summary-low-read-face) + ((and uncached (> score default-high)) + . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face) + ((and uncached (< score default-low)) + . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face) + (uncached + . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face) (t . gnus-summary-normal-read-face)) "*Controls the highlighting of summary buffer lines. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2003-05-02 18:09 ` David S Goldberg ` (2 more replies) 2003-05-02 21:12 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-04 16:57 ` David Abrahams 2 siblings, 3 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2003-05-02 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? > Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick > marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black > marks on unread messages. But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you? (If I understand you right...) -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2003-05-02 18:09 ` David S Goldberg 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 23:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 23:16 ` Simon Josefsson 2 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: David S Goldberg @ 2003-05-02 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2003 18:19:19 +0200, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen >>>>> <larsi@gnus.org> said: > Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: >> Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? >> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick >> marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black >> marks on unread messages. > But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you? (If I > understand you right...) Actually, I do so all the time. I only download if i plan to work offline, which is only when I travel. I'm plugged 95% of the time so don't need to download. Moreover, I'm in control of the expiry as I'm using nnimap. -- Dave Goldberg david.goldberg6@verizon.net ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 18:09 ` David S Goldberg @ 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-03 1:11 ` Harry Putnam ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-02 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw) David S Goldberg <david.goldberg6@verizon.net> writes: >>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2003 18:19:19 +0200, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen >>>>>> <larsi@gnus.org> said: > >> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: >>> Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? >>> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick >>> marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black >>> marks on unread messages. > >> But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you? (If I >> understand you right...) > > Actually, I do so all the time. I only download if i plan to work > offline, which is only when I travel. I'm plugged 95% of the time so > don't need to download. Moreover, I'm in control of the expiry as I'm > using nnimap. Right, that's how you use the agent. While it is a perfectly valid approach, it's based on different assumptions that those descibed in the manual. In fact, from what you described. Why aren't you leaving your server unagentized for your normal usage then agentizing when preparing to go offline? It's only four extra keystokes. I personally pay by the month but many Gnus users pay by the minute for their net access. If you payed by the minute, I'd assume that you would want minimize the expense of using Gnus. With the agent, you can do just that: 1) Start Gnus plugged to execute gnus-agent-fetch-session. In a continuous sequence of requests, the agent will fetch all of the new headers and, in groups where you've authorized it, articles that match your selection criteria. 2) Go offline and unplugged to browse articles and compose replies without incurring unnecessary connection costs. At this point, all of the articles that you are interested in will be displayed in their usual faces as they have been downloaded. If you do see the undownloaded face, then you'll know that you'll have to go online again before you can read it. 3) Go online and plugged to upload your responses. Personnally, I use the agent as a cache to improve performance. So I've added gnus-agent-fetch-selected-article to gnus-select-article-hook. That means that the first time I read an article, it's fetched into the agent. So, for me, unread articles are either marked with the undownloaded or unread face depending on whether I've used a fetch command to fetch a block of articles. All other articles are displayed in their traditional faces. So, it all depends on how you choose to use the agent.c Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-03 1:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-03 16:45 ` Kai Großjohann ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-03 1:11 UTC (permalink / raw) Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > article, it's fetched into the agent. So, for me, unread articles are > either marked with the undownloaded or unread face depending on > whether I've used a fetch command to fetch a block of articles. All > other articles are displayed in their traditional faces. There is the nub. You say `all other articles are displayed in their traditional faces' That is not what I see here. If your fetching scheme allows this: In one of your groups that is under the agentized server but where you do not download all messages. Can you mark an undownloaded article as read (and see the read, or ticked and see those faces). Even read and article online, is it marked as read? I cannot. To me a natural thing to do with the agent is download groups I want on disc for some reason, and not download others that I still may read on line. In those `online' groups I cannot see read or ticked face only undownloaded. Wouldn't it make more sense to use summary-line-format to identify undownloaded? Then other faces would not be affected, but one would still have a guide as to whether something was downloaded or not. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-03 1:11 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-03 16:45 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-05 13:48 ` David S Goldberg 2003-05-09 19:54 ` Gleb Arshinov 3 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-03 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw) Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > So, it all depends on how you choose to use the agent.c Does this mean you have a C implementation of the Agent lying around but aren't sharing it with us? Bad Kevin! -- file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature) \f 8-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-03 1:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-03 16:45 ` Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-05 13:48 ` David S Goldberg 2003-05-09 19:54 ` Gleb Arshinov 3 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: David S Goldberg @ 2003-05-05 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2003 16:02:55 -0500, Kevin Greiner >>>>> <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> said: > Personnally, I use the agent as a cache to improve performance. So I do this too, for some select groups; particularly the ones that hold messages from my boss and the multi-megabyte attachments he sends :-) And that is also why I keep the groups agentized rather than switching back and forth. > So, it all depends on how you choose to use the agent.c Exactly. The only reason for my message was that it sounded like my usage was somehow perceived (by Lars himself!!!!) as invalid and I didn't want that to be the case. Frankly I have no complaints with the implementation of the agent. I didn't love the undownload face defaults, but you showed me how to change that and I am very happy with the result. Thanks, -- Dave Goldberg david.goldberg6@verizon.net ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2003-05-05 13:48 ` David S Goldberg @ 2003-05-09 19:54 ` Gleb Arshinov 3 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Gleb Arshinov @ 2003-05-09 19:54 UTC (permalink / raw) >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: Kevin> Right, that's how you use the agent. While it is a Kevin> perfectly valid approach, it's based on different Kevin> assumptions that those descibed in the manual. In fact, Kevin> from what you described. Why aren't you leaving your Kevin> server unagentized for your normal usage then agentizing Kevin> when preparing to go offline? It's only four extra Kevin> keystokes. Hi Kevin, I just discovered that I had to agentize my nnimap server for performance reasons, even though I never (before) wanted to read it unplugged. So, that would be one reason. See article <ilu4r441m4x.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> Gleb ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2003-05-02 18:09 ` David S Goldberg @ 2003-05-02 23:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-03 16:43 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-02 23:16 ` Simon Josefsson 2 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw) Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes: > Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > >> Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? >> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick >> marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black >> marks on unread messages. > > But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you? (If I > understand you right...) I was afraid people were'nt following the line of reasoning here. Only SOME groups on the agentized server are to be downloaded, Some are read on line. The tick dormant and even read faces are just as usefull as they have ever been on those groups read online. However now they don't work on the ones to be read on line because the server is agentize and the undownloaded face overpowers all others. Making any sense yet? My take on the agent is that it allows gnus to be used in both modes. However if you use the agent mode the other mode is robbed of those faces in the current default setup. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 23:11 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-03 16:43 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-04 0:11 ` Harry Putnam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-03 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > I was afraid people were'nt following the line of reasoning here. > Only SOME groups on the agentized server are to be downloaded, Some > are read on line. The tick dormant and even read faces are just as > usefull as they have ever been on those groups read online. However > now they don't work on the ones to be read on line because the server > is agentize and the undownloaded face overpowers all others. Big kludge: create two Gnus servers both pointing to the same NNTP server. Then subscribe the to-be-read-offline groups from one server and the to-be-read-online groups from the other. -- file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-03 16:43 ` Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-04 0:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 13:21 ` Kai Großjohann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-04 0:11 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii, Size: 1126 bytes --] kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann) writes: > Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > >> I was afraid people were'nt following the line of reasoning here. >> Only SOME groups on the agentized server are to be downloaded, Some >> are read on line. The tick dormant and even read faces are just as >> usefull as they have ever been on those groups read online. However >> now they don't work on the ones to be read on line because the server >> is agentize and the undownloaded face overpowers all others. > > Big kludge: create two Gnus servers both pointing to the same NNTP > server. Then subscribe the to-be-read-offline groups from one server > and the to-be-read-online groups from the other. Haa, now there is something I hadn't thought of. But even with the possibility of a good Kludge like that, doesn't it seem only right that an undownloaded mark mind its manners and not overpower long existing faces? I think any undownloaded notation should be relegated to summary format line... It should be visible enough to those looking for it but pretty innocuous to those who want regular faces to work. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 0:11 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-04 13:21 ` Kai Großjohann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-04 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw) Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > Haa, now there is something I hadn't thought of. But even with the > possibility of a good Kludge like that, doesn't it seem only right > that an undownloaded mark mind its manners and not overpower long > existing faces? I think any undownloaded notation should be > relegated to summary format line... It should be visible enough to > those looking for it but pretty innocuous to those who want regular > faces to work. Well, actually, they are orthogonal. But I don't know if the faces mechanism can merge orthogonal dimensions in a font. The fg color could indicate marks and the bg color could indicate downloaded-ness. -- file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2003-05-02 18:09 ` David S Goldberg 2003-05-02 23:11 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-02 23:16 ` Simon Josefsson 2 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-02 23:16 UTC (permalink / raw) Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes: > Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > >> Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? >> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick >> marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black >> marks on unread messages. > > But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you? (If I > understand you right...) I have lots of ticked undownloaded messages. But perhaps I'm not using the agent as intended... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen @ 2003-05-02 21:12 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 23:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-03 1:16 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 16:57 ` David Abrahams 2 siblings, 2 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-02 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > >> I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of >> running plugged only. The current setup with undownloaded face seems >> to overpower other long standing faces and options. > > Yup. I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed? > Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick > marks, which doesn't seem right to me. And I was used to the black > marks on unread messages. > > I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but > now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen > shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? > > --- gnus-sum.el.~6.342.~ Tue Apr 29 02:44:20 2003 > +++ gnus-sum.el Fri May 2 14:16:54 2003 > @@ -902,12 +902,6 @@ > (defcustom gnus-summary-highlight > '(((eq mark gnus-canceled-mark) > . gnus-summary-cancelled-face) > - ((and uncached (> score default-high)) > - . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face) > - ((and uncached (< score default-low)) > - . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face) > - (uncached > - . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face) > ((and (> score default-high) > (or (eq mark gnus-dormant-mark) > (eq mark gnus-ticked-mark))) > @@ -935,6 +929,12 @@ > . gnus-summary-high-read-face) > ((< score default-low) > . gnus-summary-low-read-face) > + ((and uncached (> score default-high)) > + . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face) > + ((and uncached (< score default-low)) > + . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face) > + (uncached > + . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face) > (t > . gnus-summary-normal-read-face)) > "*Controls the highlighting of summary buffer lines. I realize that this will come as a surprise but this is exactly how I initially added the undownloaded faces to gnus-summary-highlight. The only problem is that it simply doesn't work. The gnus-summary-(high/low)-undownloaded-face never appear as the preceeding default-(low/high) rules override them. The undownloaded normal face does appear but only on articles that have absolutely no marks. So if you tick several articles because they appear interesting, you loose the warning that those articles are unavailable while offline. After several days of frustration, I ended up with the undownloaded faces at the beginning of the list. The patch that I would consider is to change the (and uncached (...)) tests to (and uncached gnus-agent-use-undownloaded-faces (...)). Of course, I'd like to default gnus-agent-use-undownloaded-faces to t but that would still be objectable to some. Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 21:12 ` Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-02 23:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-03 1:16 ` Harry Putnam 1 sibling, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-02 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > I realize that this will come as a surprise but this is exactly how I > initially added the undownloaded faces to gnus-summary-highlight. The > only problem is that it simply doesn't work. The > gnus-summary-(high/low)-undownloaded-face never appear as the > preceeding default-(low/high) rules override them. The undownloaded > normal face does appear but only on articles that have absolutely no > marks. So if you tick several articles because they appear > interesting, you loose the warning that those articles are unavailable > while offline. This is what I'd want though, since I'm constantly online as I'm using the agent as a cache. The undownloaded color isn't useful to me. Of course, the real problem is that the undownloaded color is so distinct that I can't separate undownloaded unread articles from read or ticked ones. If the undownloaded color was less distinct, I wouldn't have a problem. When the unread articles were black, I could see them easily, but now they just blur into with read ones. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 21:12 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 23:24 ` Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-03 1:16 ` Harry Putnam 1 sibling, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-03 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > normal face does appear but only on articles that have absolutely no > marks. So if you tick several articles because they appear > interesting, you loose the warning that those articles are unavailable > while offline. Still haven't tried Simons patch, but will shortly... Kevin, wouldn't it make more sense to use summary-format to provide warning as to [un]downloaded status? Using the face overpowers potentially usefull faces on undownloaded messages in groups where the user doesn't intend to download but does intend to read. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2003-05-02 21:12 ` Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-04 16:57 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-04 20:15 ` Simon Josefsson 2 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: David Abrahams @ 2003-05-04 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but > now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen > shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? > > --- gnus-sum.el.~6.342.~ Tue Apr 29 02:44:20 2003 > +++ gnus-sum.el Fri May 2 14:16:54 2003 > @@ -902,12 +902,6 @@ > (defcustom gnus-summary-highlight > '(((eq mark gnus-canceled-mark) > . gnus-summary-cancelled-face) > - ((and uncached (> score default-high)) > - . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face) > - ((and uncached (< score default-low)) > - . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face) > - (uncached > - . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face) > ((and (> score default-high) > (or (eq mark gnus-dormant-mark) > (eq mark gnus-ticked-mark))) > @@ -935,6 +929,12 @@ > . gnus-summary-high-read-face) > ((< score default-low) > . gnus-summary-low-read-face) > + ((and uncached (> score default-high)) > + . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face) > + ((and uncached (< score default-low)) > + . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face) > + (uncached > + . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face) > (t > . gnus-summary-normal-read-face)) > "*Controls the highlighting of summary buffer lines. > I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 16:57 ` David Abrahams @ 2003-05-04 20:15 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-04 23:10 ` David Abrahams 0 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-04 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes: > Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > >> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but >> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen >> shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? > > I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was. For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 20:15 ` Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-04 23:10 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-04 23:31 ` Simon Josefsson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: David Abrahams @ 2003-05-04 23:10 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes: > >> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: >> >>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but >>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen >>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? >> >> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was. > > For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead > of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost > identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages. That's what it does for me, too. What I meant was I'm not sure what it's doing *technically*. If moving those Sexprs down makes them ineffectual, can't they be eliminated? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:10 ` David Abrahams @ 2003-05-04 23:31 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-04 23:46 ` Harry Putnam ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-04 23:31 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: ding David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes: > Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > >> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes: >> >>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: >>> >>>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but >>>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen >>>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? >>> >>> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was. >> >> For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead >> of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost >> identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages. > > That's what it does for me, too. What I meant was I'm not sure what > it's doing *technically*. If moving those Sexprs down makes them > ineffectual, can't they be eliminated? Ah. But it still has priority over the read mark. So if you have a read, undownloaded, article it will be marked with the undownloaded face instead of the read face. However, if the article is unread (or ticked, or ...), you will see the unread (or tick, or ...) face, instead of the undownloaded face. Wasn't undownloaded articles marked with a @ or % mark or something before? Do people care about the downloadedness of articles? I don't. If you select the article, you'll notice it is either there or not, and until I want to read the article, I don't care if it exists locally or not. But if I want to read it, having it marked in a special color isn't going to help me, since the article still doesn't exist locally. Hm. I must be missing some kind of use people make of the face. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:31 ` Simon Josefsson @ 2003-05-04 23:46 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 15:08 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-05 0:12 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-05 14:56 ` Kai Großjohann 2 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-04 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > Hm. I must be missing some kind of use people make of the face. At one time I was a heavy user of the agent. I can tell you that it can be confusing in a group that you read both on and off line. I often had to back up and download a message that I had read on line but never downloaded. Back then you couldn't tell. It just showed read. (While online) So I can see some value in somekind of indicator. that is present even when online. What I take issue with is again related to reading both on and off line on the same server. The undownloaded face server to show whether something is written to disk or not, but I think it should not over shadow other usefull marks one might want to use. So, I wonder if there is isn't some other way to indicate downloadedness. Not use a face at all. Kai says that is orthogonal thinking. Running at right angles I guess he means, or talking apples and oranges. But can't we use something in summary format line to indicate the downloadedness of an article and just drop the undownloaded faces? As Kevin pointed out that last part can be done by removing the 3 default cons cells pertaining to downloadedness at gnus-summary-highlight. That returns you to pre downloaded face behavior, which I favor. But since I see usefullness in knowing downloadedness can't we do it another way that doesn't use an all powerfull face? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:46 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-05 15:08 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-06 0:53 ` Harry Putnam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 34+ messages in thread From: Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-05 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw) Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes: > Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > >> Hm. I must be missing some kind of use people make of the face. > > At one time I was a heavy user of the agent. I can tell you that it > can be confusing in a group that you read both on and off line. I > often had to back up and download a message that I had read on line > but never downloaded. Back then you couldn't tell. It just showed > read. (While online) So I can see some value in somekind of indicator. > that is present even when online. What I take issue with is again > related to reading both on and off line on the same server. FYI, I am working on a group parameter that will provide fine-grain control over which groups display the undownloaded faces. Aside from turning the faces on/off, the undownloaded faces will still function as they do now. > The undownloaded face server to show whether something is written to > disk or not, but I think it should not over shadow other usefull > marks one might want to use. So, I wonder if there is isn't some > other way to indicate downloadedness. Not use a face at all. Yes. Kai developed a format indicator at the same time that I worked on the face solution. > Kai says that is orthogonal thinking. Running at right angles I guess > he means, or talking apples and oranges. But can't we use something > in summary format line to indicate the downloadedness of an article > and just drop the undownloaded faces? > > As Kevin pointed out that last part can be done by removing the 3 > default cons cells pertaining to downloadedness at > gnus-summary-highlight. That returns you to pre downloaded face > behavior, which I favor. But since I see usefullness in knowing > downloadedness can't we do it another way that doesn't use an all > powerfull face? Now, you're coming closer to the problem. What you're seeing as arbitrary choices on my part are actually the result of constraints imposed by the existing framework. The summary format line, by virtue of being a string, makes it trivial to extend its capabilities. The downside is that 1) if I changed the default, I'd annoy everyone as even unagentized summary buffers would show a new column, and 2) those people who had already customized the format line would have to read the manual to discover the new feature. So, we have a new format but you have to go looking for it to take advantage of it. The face selection is handled by gnus-summary-highlight. It's an alist of conditions and face symbols. It functions just like the cond function. The first non-nil condition will select the face. This structure is rarely customized as you're specifying both the face and the precidence of faces. In my opinion, this mechanism needs to be rewritten. One of my first releases of the undownloaded face was just that, one face. A number of people were upset that undownloaded articles hid the score faces so I went back and created the high/low undownloade faces (3 faces total). Now, you would like to see a read/unread status (6 faces total), ticked/unticked (12 faces total), etc. (Aren't permutations fun :) ). This is an option, but one that makes it difficult for individuals to customize Gnus to a new color-scheme. What we need is a highlight structure that specifies face attributes (bold/italic/normal, red/green/blue, etc.) then matches on multiple conditions. Of course, we'd then need some sort of face engine to find/create a face for each combination of attributes. Anyone know of one? Kevin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-05 15:08 ` Kevin Greiner @ 2003-05-06 0:53 ` Harry Putnam 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-06 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw) Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes: > FYI, I am working on a group parameter that will provide fine-grain > control over which groups display the undownloaded faces. Aside from > turning the faces on/off, the undownloaded faces will still function > as they do now. Egad... I'm beginning to see the complexities now.. Thanks for the walk thru. Your solution above looks like one way to please most people. Even me.. If I'm following your thinking here, this would be a ready made Gp entry that would turn on the (current) undowloaded face behavior. If left off one would have the behavior that existed before your work on undownloaded faces. Untill such time as the complex choice engine you describe might be invented, this looks like a happy solution. Maybe not even too hard. Maybe something in Gp that just removes the 3 cons cells? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:31 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-04 23:46 ` Harry Putnam @ 2003-05-05 0:12 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-05 14:56 ` Kai Großjohann 2 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: David Abrahams @ 2003-05-05 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes: > >> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: >> >>> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes: >>> >>>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but >>>>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen >>>>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size. So: Opinions? >>>> >>>> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was. >>> >>> For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead >>> of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost >>> identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages. >> >> That's what it does for me, too. What I meant was I'm not sure what >> it's doing *technically*. If moving those Sexprs down makes them >> ineffectual, can't they be eliminated? > > Ah. But it still has priority over the read mark. So if you have a > read, undownloaded, article it will be marked with the undownloaded > face instead of the read face. However, if the article is unread (or > ticked, or ...), you will see the unread (or tick, or ...) face, > instead of the undownloaded face. > > Wasn't undownloaded articles marked with a @ or % mark or something > before? Do people care about the downloadedness of articles? I > don't. I care a little. I sometimes go away from my network connection and want to take a record of some conversations with me. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: Overbearing undownloaded face 2003-05-04 23:31 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-04 23:46 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 0:12 ` David Abrahams @ 2003-05-05 14:56 ` Kai Großjohann 2 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Kai Großjohann @ 2003-05-05 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw) Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes: > If you select the article, you'll notice it is either there or not, > and until I want to read the article, I don't care if it exists > locally or not. But if I want to read it, having it marked in a > special color isn't going to help me, since the article still doesn't > exist locally. I thhink people who are online might appreciate the indication. Then they know which articles still need to be marked for download. -- file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-05-09 19:54 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 34+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-05-02 1:49 Overbearing undownloaded face Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 1:54 ` Henrik Enberg 2003-05-02 2:37 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-02 4:01 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 5:37 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 23:12 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 14:19 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-05 14:50 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-06 16:37 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-02 12:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-02 16:19 ` Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen 2003-05-02 18:09 ` David S Goldberg 2003-05-02 21:02 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-03 1:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-03 16:45 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-05 13:48 ` David S Goldberg 2003-05-09 19:54 ` Gleb Arshinov 2003-05-02 23:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-03 16:43 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-04 0:11 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 13:21 ` Kai Großjohann 2003-05-02 23:16 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-02 21:12 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-02 23:24 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-03 1:16 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-04 16:57 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-04 20:15 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-04 23:10 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-04 23:31 ` Simon Josefsson 2003-05-04 23:46 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 15:08 ` Kevin Greiner 2003-05-06 0:53 ` Harry Putnam 2003-05-05 0:12 ` David Abrahams 2003-05-05 14:56 ` Kai Großjohann
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).