Re: B DEL is being treated as expiry?

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

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) wrote:
> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
>> Ideally, I think it would be nice for all the expiry code to be
>> removed from the backend interface.  Given
>> nn*-request-{move,accept}-article, Gnus can do expiry itself, and more
>> uniformly than when backends do it themselves.
>
> Yay!  Way to go!  Just implement nnchoke-request-delete-article in
> all backends, and Gnus does the rest.

nnchoke-request-move-article can already be used for that purpose,
given a suitable accept-form.  These are the backends that have
-request-expire-articles but not -request-move-article: nnrss,
nnslashdot, nnsoup, nnvirtual.  Do we care about them for B DEL, or
are they too special-purpose?  Could we add -request-move-article if
it's needed?

> Hm.  Except for computing the time for expiry.  I think different
> backends use different methods.  That's not good.  Maybe some
> additional mechanism is needed for the time computation.

Yes, that variation is confusing.  It would be nice to make all
backends the same by making Gnus decide when an article is old enough.
And if different ways of deciding that are useful, it should be an
explicit configuration setting, orthogonal to the choice of backend.
Gnus would need to be able to ask the backend when the article arrived
in the group, which isn't currently possible, althoguh the Date field
is always accessible.  Anyway, this is separate from the B DEL
problem.


paul