From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/67281 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Vitaly Mayatskikh Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: gnus and imap Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:47:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <877iabwtjx.fsf@randomsample.de> <87abf51c4m.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <874p5dm35l.fsf@randomsample.de> <87iqttq7ja.fsf@randomsample.de> <87d4k0t7ga.fsf@randomsample.de> <87myj3wzp7.fsf@randomsample.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1219567743 26723 80.91.229.12 (24 Aug 2008 08:49:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:49:03 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M15732@lists.math.uh.edu Sun Aug 24 10:49:57 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KXBIJ-0003YE-LA for ding-account@gmane.org; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:49:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KXBGV-0003WI-NT; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 03:48:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KXBGU-0003W3-0T for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 03:48:02 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KXBGQ-0004hw-MW for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 03:48:01 -0500 Original-Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.176]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1KXBGR-0007KX-00 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:47:59 +0200 Original-Received: by ik-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id c21so1080652ika.1 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:47:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:references :date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=5efkoAZ0S5jje9OkcoX2+Vmiqel0GuimBzIEGlcQ6uY=; b=E6gQHAciZfG6kDjpHb5Z8BGnmHP48zrcceKrU5rlZVh3ZBg9CCh7ATETEFIsITcclR uCPBpMvJ13xWZOGEtQDK9Vun/R1lMgiT5CRWKTwn8y6VJ/euF/ATDubLMjZc65ScR0UE rOgKxgDUVSsMIJlCZkk11grKYP4OTlHVHFoHc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type; b=LaNwadSpww2ZnSkCXoZjALCluITzHaC3Uko9q5T/+elNEzNRPgZJFUyybsXkfjlmYG crIM/XMZM3+pu904DXcyuCLkCvQ2u9izasGvYChmFgD/nexPWwgtgMl8wl2ZDyjlzPsS pQEkw5OaPTYo5j1r0ezTYKj4/zd1JLXIw37j0= Original-Received: by 10.210.51.10 with SMTP id y10mr4576543eby.14.1219567677263; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:47:57 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from gravicappa.englab.brq.redhat.com ( [78.102.31.216]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t12sm14476288gvd.4.2008.08.24.01.47.55 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:47:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87myj3wzp7.fsf@randomsample.de> (David Engster's message of "Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:52:52 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:67281 Archived-At: David Engster writes: >> I can't get this scenario (probably, due to different settings). Will dig >> around more. > > Try playing with gnus-read-active-file and call gnus-group-get-new-news > with a level argument. nnimap is my primary select method, maybe this > also comes into play. May be so, because your test code doesn't show me the bug in my configuration (nnnil is primary, two nnimaps are secondary). >> I'm only afraid of spaghetti code. For me it's better to have one clean >> and consistent solution. > > Absolutely. The problem is that active information is used throughout > Gnus, and the code is in parts already pretty convoluted, especially the > ones dealing with updating groups and checking for unread messages. I > guess that putting unread information in gnus-info would affect fewer > parts of the code. Yes, but we still have to fix all this convoluted code (for gnus-unread-info or whatever). Unread articles calculations (count of articles, list of articles) are totally wrong for the case of IMAP. > Another suggestion: maybe all this work should be strictly kept in the > back end itself? We could implement a new back end function, like > 'nnimap-unread-articles GROUP SERVER', which just returns the number of > unread articles. We can check for the existence of specific back end > functions with gnus-check-backend-function, so no need for additional > flags. It might be a good idea to extend api of back ends. By the way, have Gnus developers any plans of doing large changes in Gnus, like refactoring, global cleanup, etc? -- wbr, Vitaly