Re: B DEL is being treated as expiry?

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

Karl Kleinpaste <karl@charcoal.com> wrote:
> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>> The current situation is better than before Nevin's change,
>
> No, it isn't, because it used to be the case that when I said, "delete
> this," *it was deleted*.

That's only because you don't set the nnmail-expiry-target variable.
If you did, this would have been already broken before the change.
B DEL has obeyed n-e-t for a long time, and now it obeys expiry-target
parameters for consistency.  This way, the problem annoys *everyone*,
and so it gets fixed sooner.  See how that's better? :)

> At the very least, the change which induced expiry should be reverted
> so that we get deletions back.

I don't think that would be an improvement now.

We want both functions available (delete immediately/expire
immediately), right?  So how shall we express this in the backend
interface?  Right now, there's just one "force" argument to
nnchoke-request-expire-articles.  Should we just pass different values
there to get expiry/deletion?  Or would we ever want deletion without
immediacy?  I.e., operate on only the "old enough" articles, but
delete them instead of expiring them?  If we want that, we'd probably
have to add another argument; "force" could indicate immediacy, and
"mode" could indicate expiry vs. deletion.


paul