Re: `gnus-unseen-mark' everywhere

[prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc)]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> wrote:
> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
>> Well, at least some things other than "seen" should probably be still
>> dealt with as they are now.  E.g., "cache" really shouldn't be stored
>> in any backend, because the information "cache" represents has nothing
>> to do with what is stored in the backend.
>
> Hm.  One could argue (as I probably did in our last discussion) that
> the "seen" mark does not have to do with anything in the backend
> either.

It doesn't have to do with the backend itself, but it does have to do
with what is stored via the backend - i.e., the articles.  OTOH,
"cache" has to do with information always stored outside the backend.
There's nothing outside the backend that "seen" depends on, or must be
synchronized with, etc.

>> Gnus could define a list of marks that are supposed to be per-user in
>> shared groups; [...]  Backends could then DTRT with whichever marks
>> are included in that variable
...
> Right now the dichotomy is between marks that belong in backends and
> marks that doesn't belong there, and among the few marks that doesn't
> belong in backends (seen cache download unsend score) only "seen" is
> questionable.

Or else all the others are; I think last time, the idea appeared that
the information represented by those marks should perhaps not be
represented by marks at all, but instead by something else.  Did
anything ever come of the proposed cache/agent unification?  I think
such a project could also handle the de-mark-ification of at least
"cache" and "download", right?


paul