Re: Never mind

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>]

Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> writes:

> > Yes.  The way it does this now is by marking the undownloaded articles
> > as read.
> 
> Hm... I agree with Rich, in disliking this approach (I mean: they
> *aren't* actually read...), but I don't really have a constructive
> solution, except to suggest yet another tick mark.

Well, perhaps.  They could me marked with, uhm, "@" (which would be
"unread" in the manner of "!").  Article selection commands would skip
past these articles, just as they do with "!".  Yup, I think I'll do
that. 

> Having them clumped, and visually separate, would be very useful when
> your walking through them, and decide which to down load.  They could
> enter their normal threading position, after downloading.

Well, if we have this situation:

    [  21: Paul Stodghill      ] Bug with gnus-group-jump-to-group and topics
@       [ 1035: Hrvoje Niksic       ] 
            [  21: Paul Stodghill      ] 

(Hrvoje's article wasn't downloaded because it was too long.)  Why
would you want to break threading and put that article in the top (or
somewhere) of the summary buffer?  Having these @ articles in the
thread doesn't impede normal reading, and would give us more
information whether to download the article or not than when displayed
outside the thread.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen