Overbearing undownloaded face

Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of
running plugged only.  The current setup with undownloaded face seems
to overpower other long standing faces and options.

When messages come in, they seem to receive a dull grey face
(normal-undownloaded) and unless one actuall downloads the message it
is not possible to change that face with other actions that normally
would change a message face.  Things like ticked, domant, read etc
have no effect on this overpowering face.

That might make some sense if the user had true predicate in all
groups and never needed to keep track of undownloaded but read or
ticked but undownloaded or any number of other possibilities, one
might encounter while online.

I haven't noticed any complaints about this so am wondering if it
might be some screw up in my local settings.

Just at a quick thought, it seems the undownloaded face is more a
pain in the butt than a help.

Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way?  If the
latter how would I override or disable this behavior? 

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Henrik Enberg]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way?  If the
> latter how would I override or disable this behavior? 

Customize gnus-summary-{low,high}-undownloaded-face.  I agree that the
default is a bit overwhelming.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Henrik Enberg <henrik@enberg.org> writes:

> Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way?  If the
>> latter how would I override or disable this behavior? 
>
> Customize gnus-summary-{low,high}-undownloaded-face.  I agree that the
> default is a bit overwhelming.

Maybe I'm not following you here.  But first what determines a high
interest undownloaded or low interest undownloaded?  Does it involve
scoring? (I don't use scoring)

I did customize the normal-undownloaded but that has no bearing on the
real problem.  That is, the faces associated with other marks  are not
possible unless the article is downloaded. (read, ticked etc)  

Does customizing low high somehow affect that problem?.
Are you able to mark undownloaded messages as read, ticked, dormant
etc and see a face change? 

Many of the groups under my agentized server are in default category
which I have predicated to false.  I don't want to download them but
do want to read them online (plugged) and be allowed to have faces
associated with read, ticked, dormant etc be used.  The fact that the
group is under an agentized server shouldn't break those faces.

What I see is that in those default (false) category groups messages
will never be downloaded so all the normal gnus faces for read,
ticked etc are useless.  Surely this is not the intent of the
overpowering undownloaded face?  We used to be able to have groups
only read online coexist with agentized groups and have no face
conflict.  Now it appears that will only work if the groups are on
different servers, one agentize the other not.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kevin Greiner]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of
> running plugged only.  The current setup with undownloaded face seems
> to overpower other long standing faces and options.
> 
> When messages come in, they seem to receive a dull grey face
> (normal-undownloaded) and unless one actuall downloads the message it
> is not possible to change that face with other actions that normally
> would change a message face.  Things like ticked, domant, read etc
> have no effect on this overpowering face.

Well, it's all in the eye of the beholder.  Several colors were tried
before the group tired of seeing it changed or decided that they liked
the green.  To be honest, I'm not sure which.

> That might make some sense if the user had true predicate in all
> groups and never needed to keep track of undownloaded but read or
> ticked but undownloaded or any number of other possibilities, one
> might encounter while online.
>
> I haven't noticed any complaints about this so am wondering if it
> might be some screw up in my local settings.
> 
> Just at a quick thought, it seems the undownloaded face is more a
> pain in the butt than a help.

The agent isn't much use if you haven't downloaded an article.  If you
use gnus-agent-fetch-session (J s) then the undownloaded face may not
be much of a help.  However, if you like to pick and choose the
articles to download, it helps with keeping track of your decisions.

> Henrik Enberg <henrik@enberg.org> writes:
>
>> Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>>
>>> Is it a local problem or is it intended to work this way?  If the
>>> latter how would I override or disable this behavior? 
>>
>> Customize gnus-summary-{low,high}-undownloaded-face.  I agree that the
>> default is a bit overwhelming.

That will change the color.  If you want to completely remove the
undownloaded face (and thereby restore the behavior that you're
comfortable with), do the following.

Customize gnus-summary-highlight.  Remove the three cons cells that
reference the undownloaded faces.

If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to
gnus-summary-format-spec.

> Maybe I'm not following you here.  But first what determines a high
> interest undownloaded or low interest undownloaded?  Does it involve
> scoring? (I don't use scoring)

It uses scoring.

> I did customize the normal-undownloaded but that has no bearing on the
> real problem.  That is, the faces associated with other marks  are not
> possible unless the article is downloaded. (read, ticked etc)  

The agent was largely designed from the perspective of the nntp
backend.  Since the retention times on many servers is fairly low, it
really not safe to mark an article then expect it to still be
available later.  However, if you fetch it into the agent, you can
then mark it knowing that it will always be available.

> Does customizing low high somehow affect that problem?.
> Are you able to mark undownloaded messages as read, ticked, dormant
> etc and see a face change? 
>
> Many of the groups under my agentized server are in default category
> which I have predicated to false.  I don't want to download them but
> do want to read them online (plugged) and be allowed to have faces
> associated with read, ticked, dormant etc be used.  The fact that the
> group is under an agentized server shouldn't break those faces.
>
> What I see is that in those default (false) category groups messages
> will never be downloaded so all the normal gnus faces for read,
> ticked etc are useless.

Actually, 'never' is a little misleading.  All that you've done is
told Gnus that you don't want it to automatically fetch articles into
the agent.  The default category will not prevent you from using a
much more sophisticated selection tool, your mind, to fetch
interesting articles into the agent.

>  Surely this is not the intent of the
> overpowering undownloaded face?  We used to be able to have groups
> only read online coexist with agentized groups and have no face
> conflict.  Now it appears that will only work if the groups are on
> different servers, one agentize the other not.

No, everything is customizable to the point that you can get back the
exact non-agentized appearance.

Kevin

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> Well, it's all in the eye of the beholder.  Several colors were tried
> before the group tired of seeing it changed or decided that they liked
> the green.  To be honest, I'm not sure which.

The actual color was never my complaint

[...]

>> Just at a quick thought, it seems the undownloaded face is more a
>> pain in the butt than a help.
>
> The agent isn't much use if you haven't downloaded an article.  If you
> use gnus-agent-fetch-session (J s) then the undownloaded face may not
> be much of a help.  However, if you like to pick and choose the
> articles to download, it helps with keeping track of your decisions.

I see the idea of the undownloaded face.  But it seems to be intruding
in an area where agent qualities are not called for.  Its over-riding
long time functionality developed before there was an agent.  Nulling
out options designed for news reading without the agent.  Like
different faces for read, dormant etc.  Those options (or at least
their faces) shouldn't disappear because the server is agentized.

> That will change the color.  If you want to completely remove the
> undownloaded face (and thereby restore the behavior that you're
> comfortable with), do the following.
>
> Customize gnus-summary-highlight.  Remove the three cons cells that
> reference the undownloaded faces.

Ok, now were talking.

> If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to
> gnus-summary-format-spec.

I'm thinking using format-spec  should be the default.  It wouldn't over-ride
existing faces or options for other styles of reading

> The agent was largely designed from the perspective of the nntp
> backend.  Since the retention times on many servers is fairly low, it
> really not safe to mark an article then expect it to still be
> available later.  However, if you fetch it into the agent, you can
> then mark it knowing that it will always be available.

Those very marks, and their faces were invented for precisely the
usage you say is unsafe.  Tick, dormant, read all were available long
before the agent came into being ..(around quassia-18 or so, I think).

The whole business of tieing tick to cache was around before the
agent.  But it wasn't felt necessary to force all other faces into
submission if a message was not cached.

[...]

> No, everything is customizable to the point that you can get back the
> exact non-agentized appearance.

Thats the beauty of gnus eh?  But still, it seems that undownloaded
face thing makes it hard to use the agent as it was designed to be
used.

That is, to allow both styles of reading in one tool.  Plugged and
unplugged.  In the current setup, features that are, strickly
speaking, only relevant to agentized messages are getting into the way
of `plugged' usage by overriding marks and their faces - in fact,
rendering them useless for Plugged reading.

Thanks for the info and aiming me at those three cons-cells.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> Customize gnus-summary-highlight.  Remove the three cons cells that
> reference the undownloaded faces.
>
> If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to
> gnus-summary-format-spec.

Kevin, can you elaborate on the text indicator proceedure.  You are
talking about some thing that will appear in the summary format that
will indicate downloadedness right?

How might that be done?

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kevin Greiner]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:
>
>> Customize gnus-summary-highlight.  Remove the three cons cells that
>> reference the undownloaded faces.
>>
>> If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to
>> gnus-summary-format-spec.
>
> Kevin, can you elaborate on the text indicator proceedure.  You are
> talking about some thing that will appear in the summary format that
> will indicate downloadedness right?
>
> How might that be done?

Sorry, mistyped the variable name.  What you want is gnus-summary-line-format.

Enter

c-h v gnus-summary-line-format

You'll get a buffer listing all of the format specifiers that can be
placed in the spec.  At the bottom of the buffer, you'll have a
customized button which will let you edit gnus-summary-line-format.

The %O specifier is a fixed width (1 char) field.  It's value will be
'+' when the article has been downloaded, '-' when the article is
undownloaded, and ' ' when the server is not agentized.

If you don't like the +/- characters, you can customize
gnus-downloaded-mark/gnus-undownloaded-mark to use different
characters.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kai Großjohann]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:
>
>> Customize gnus-summary-highlight.  Remove the three cons cells that
>> reference the undownloaded faces.
>>
>> If you would prefer a text indicator, you can add the %O specification to
>> gnus-summary-format-spec.
>
> Kevin, can you elaborate on the text indicator proceedure.  You are
> talking about some thing that will appear in the summary format that
> will indicate downloadedness right?
>
> How might that be done?

As he said, add %O to gnus-summary-line-format.

-- 
file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature)

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kai Großjohann]

kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> As he said, add %O to gnus-summary-line-format.

Oh, he said gnus-summary-highlight.  Sorry.
-- 
file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature)

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Simon Josefsson]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of
> running plugged only.  The current setup with undownloaded face seems
> to overpower other long standing faces and options.

Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
marks on unread messages.

I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?

--- gnus-sum.el.~6.342.~	Tue Apr 29 02:44:20 2003
+++ gnus-sum.el	Fri May  2 14:16:54 2003
@@ -902,12 +902,6 @@
 (defcustom gnus-summary-highlight
   '(((eq mark gnus-canceled-mark)
      . gnus-summary-cancelled-face)
-    ((and uncached (> score default-high))
-     . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face)
-    ((and uncached (< score default-low))
-     . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face)
-    (uncached
-     . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face)
     ((and (> score default-high)
 	  (or (eq mark gnus-dormant-mark)
 	      (eq mark gnus-ticked-mark)))
@@ -935,6 +929,12 @@
      . gnus-summary-high-read-face)
     ((< score default-low)
      . gnus-summary-low-read-face)
+    ((and uncached (> score default-high))
+     . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face)
+    ((and uncached (< score default-low))
+     . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face)
+    (uncached
+     . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face)
     (t
      . gnus-summary-normal-read-face))
   "*Controls the highlighting of summary buffer lines.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
> marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
> marks on unread messages.

But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you?  (If I
understand you right...)

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

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2003 18:19:19 +0200, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
>>>>> <larsi@gnus.org> said:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>> Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
>> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
>> marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
>> marks on unread messages.

> But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you?  (If I
> understand you right...)

Actually, I do so all the time.  I only download if i plan to work
offline, which is only when I travel.  I'm plugged 95% of the time so
don't need to download.  Moreover, I'm in control of the expiry as I'm
using nnimap.

-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kevin Greiner]

David S Goldberg <david.goldberg6@verizon.net> writes:

>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2003 18:19:19 +0200, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
>>>>>> <larsi@gnus.org> said:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>> Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
>>> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
>>> marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
>>> marks on unread messages.
>
>> But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you?  (If I
>> understand you right...)
>
> Actually, I do so all the time.  I only download if i plan to work
> offline, which is only when I travel.  I'm plugged 95% of the time so
> don't need to download.  Moreover, I'm in control of the expiry as I'm
> using nnimap.

Right, that's how you use the agent.  While it is a perfectly valid
approach, it's based on different assumptions that those descibed in
the manual.  In fact, from what you described.  Why aren't you leaving
your server unagentized for your normal usage then agentizing when
preparing to go offline?  It's only four extra keystokes.

I personally pay by the month but many Gnus users pay by the minute
for their net access.  If you payed by the minute, I'd assume that you
would want minimize the expense of using Gnus.  With the agent, you
can do just that:

1) Start Gnus plugged to execute gnus-agent-fetch-session.  In a
   continuous sequence of requests, the agent will fetch all of the
   new headers and, in groups where you've authorized it, articles
   that match your selection criteria.
2) Go offline and unplugged to browse articles and compose replies
   without incurring unnecessary connection costs.  At this point, all
   of the articles that you are interested in will be displayed in
   their usual faces as they have been downloaded.  If you do see the
   undownloaded face, then you'll know that you'll have to go online
   again before you can read it.
3) Go online and plugged to upload your responses.


Personnally, I use the agent as a cache to improve performance.  So
I've added gnus-agent-fetch-selected-article to
gnus-select-article-hook.  That means that the first time I read an
article, it's fetched into the agent.  So, for me, unread articles are
either marked with the undownloaded or unread face depending on
whether I've used a fetch command to fetch a block of articles.  All
other articles are displayed in their traditional faces.

So, it all depends on how you choose to use the agent.c

Kevin

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> article, it's fetched into the agent.  So, for me, unread articles are
> either marked with the undownloaded or unread face depending on
> whether I've used a fetch command to fetch a block of articles.  All
> other articles are displayed in their traditional faces.

There is the nub.  You say `all other articles are displayed in their
traditional faces'  That is not what I see here.

If your fetching scheme allows this:  In one of your groups
that is under the agentized server but where you do not download all
messages.  Can you mark an undownloaded article as read (and see the
read, or ticked and see those faces).  Even read and article online,
is it marked as read?

I cannot.  

To me a natural thing to do with the agent is download groups I want
on disc for some reason, and not download others that I still may read
on line.  In those `online' groups I cannot see read or ticked face
only undownloaded.  

Wouldn't it make more sense to use summary-line-format to identify
undownloaded?  Then other faces would not be affected, but one would
still have a guide as to whether something was downloaded or not.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kai Großjohann]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> So, it all depends on how you choose to use the agent.c

Does this mean you have a C implementation of the Agent lying around
but aren't sharing it with us?  Bad Kevin!
-- 
file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature)

\f

8-)

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2003 16:02:55 -0500, Kevin Greiner
>>>>> <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> said:

> Personnally, I use the agent as a cache to improve performance.  So

I do this too, for some select groups; particularly the ones that hold
messages from my boss and the multi-megabyte attachments he sends :-)
And that is also why I keep the groups agentized rather than switching
back and forth.

> So, it all depends on how you choose to use the agent.c

Exactly.  The only reason for my message was that it sounded like my
usage was somehow perceived (by Lars himself!!!!) as invalid and I
didn't want that to be the case.  Frankly I have no complaints with
the implementation of the agent.  I didn't love the undownload face
defaults, but you showed me how to change that and I am very happy
with the result.

Thanks,
-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Gleb Arshinov]

>>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

    Kevin> Right, that's how you use the agent.  While it is a
    Kevin> perfectly valid approach, it's based on different
    Kevin> assumptions that those descibed in the manual.  In fact,
    Kevin> from what you described.  Why aren't you leaving your
    Kevin> server unagentized for your normal usage then agentizing
    Kevin> when preparing to go offline?  It's only four extra
    Kevin> keystokes.

Hi Kevin,

I just discovered that I had to agentize my nnimap server for
performance reasons, even though I never (before) wanted to read it
unplugged.  So, that would be one reason.

See article <ilu4r441m4x.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>

Gleb

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
>> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
>> marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
>> marks on unread messages.
>
> But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you?  (If I
> understand you right...)

I was afraid people were'nt following the line of reasoning here.
Only SOME groups on the agentized server are to be downloaded, Some
are read on line.  The tick dormant and even read faces are just as
usefull as they have ever been on those groups read online.  However
now they don't work on the ones to be read on line because the server 
is agentize and the undownloaded face overpowers all others.

Making any sense yet?  My take on the agent is that it allows gnus to
be used in both modes.  However if you use the agent mode the other
mode is robbed of those faces in the current default setup.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kai Großjohann]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> I was afraid people were'nt following the line of reasoning here.
> Only SOME groups on the agentized server are to be downloaded, Some
> are read on line.  The tick dormant and even read faces are just as
> usefull as they have ever been on those groups read online.  However
> now they don't work on the ones to be read on line because the server 
> is agentize and the undownloaded face overpowers all others.

Big kludge: create two Gnus servers both pointing to the same NNTP
server.  Then subscribe the to-be-read-offline groups from one server
and the to-be-read-online groups from the other.

-- 
file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature)

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii, Size: 1126 bytes --]

kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> I was afraid people were'nt following the line of reasoning here.
>> Only SOME groups on the agentized server are to be downloaded, Some
>> are read on line.  The tick dormant and even read faces are just as
>> usefull as they have ever been on those groups read online.  However
>> now they don't work on the ones to be read on line because the server 
>> is agentize and the undownloaded face overpowers all others.
>
> Big kludge: create two Gnus servers both pointing to the same NNTP
> server.  Then subscribe the to-be-read-offline groups from one server
> and the to-be-read-online groups from the other.

Haa, now there is something I hadn't thought of.  But even with the
possibility of a good Kludge like that, doesn't it seem only right
that an undownloaded mark mind its manners and not overpower long
existing faces?  I think any undownloaded notation should be
relegated to summary format line... It should be visible enough to
those looking for it but pretty innocuous to those who want regular
faces to work.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kai Großjohann]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Haa, now there is something I hadn't thought of.  But even with the
> possibility of a good Kludge like that, doesn't it seem only right
> that an undownloaded mark mind its manners and not overpower long
> existing faces?  I think any undownloaded notation should be
> relegated to summary format line... It should be visible enough to
> those looking for it but pretty innocuous to those who want regular
> faces to work.

Well, actually, they are orthogonal.  But I don't know if the faces
mechanism can merge orthogonal dimensions in a font.  The fg color
could indicate marks and the bg color could indicate downloaded-ness.

-- 
file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature)

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Simon Josefsson]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
>> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
>> marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
>> marks on unread messages.
>
> But you wouldn't tick undownloaded messages, would you?  (If I
> understand you right...)

I have lots of ticked undownloaded messages.  But perhaps I'm not
using the agent as intended...

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kevin Greiner]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> I've recently come back to using the agent after several mnths of
>> running plugged only.  The current setup with undownloaded face seems
>> to overpower other long standing faces and options.
>
> Yup.  I've been using this, perhaps the defaults should be changed?
> Currently undownloadable marks is more important than, say, tick
> marks, which doesn't seem right to me.  And I was used to the black
> marks on unread messages.
>
> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>
> --- gnus-sum.el.~6.342.~	Tue Apr 29 02:44:20 2003
> +++ gnus-sum.el	Fri May  2 14:16:54 2003
> @@ -902,12 +902,6 @@
>  (defcustom gnus-summary-highlight
>    '(((eq mark gnus-canceled-mark)
>       . gnus-summary-cancelled-face)
> -    ((and uncached (> score default-high))
> -     . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face)
> -    ((and uncached (< score default-low))
> -     . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face)
> -    (uncached
> -     . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face)
>      ((and (> score default-high)
>  	  (or (eq mark gnus-dormant-mark)
>  	      (eq mark gnus-ticked-mark)))
> @@ -935,6 +929,12 @@
>       . gnus-summary-high-read-face)
>      ((< score default-low)
>       . gnus-summary-low-read-face)
> +    ((and uncached (> score default-high))
> +     . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face)
> +    ((and uncached (< score default-low))
> +     . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face)
> +    (uncached
> +     . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face)
>      (t
>       . gnus-summary-normal-read-face))
>    "*Controls the highlighting of summary buffer lines.

I realize that this will come as a surprise but this is exactly how I
initially added the undownloaded faces to gnus-summary-highlight.  The
only problem is that it simply doesn't work.  The
gnus-summary-(high/low)-undownloaded-face never appear as the
preceeding default-(low/high) rules override them.  The undownloaded
normal face does appear but only on articles that have absolutely no
marks.  So if you tick several articles because they appear
interesting, you loose the warning that those articles are unavailable
while offline.

After several days of frustration, I ended up with the undownloaded
faces at the beginning of the list.

The patch that I would consider is to change the (and uncached (...))
tests to (and uncached gnus-agent-use-undownloaded-faces (...)).  Of
course, I'd like to default gnus-agent-use-undownloaded-faces to t
but that would still be objectable to some.

Kevin

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Simon Josefsson]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> I realize that this will come as a surprise but this is exactly how I
> initially added the undownloaded faces to gnus-summary-highlight.  The
> only problem is that it simply doesn't work.  The
> gnus-summary-(high/low)-undownloaded-face never appear as the
> preceeding default-(low/high) rules override them.  The undownloaded
> normal face does appear but only on articles that have absolutely no
> marks.  So if you tick several articles because they appear
> interesting, you loose the warning that those articles are unavailable
> while offline.

This is what I'd want though, since I'm constantly online as I'm using
the agent as a cache.  The undownloaded color isn't useful to me.

Of course, the real problem is that the undownloaded color is so
distinct that I can't separate undownloaded unread articles from read
or ticked ones.  If the undownloaded color was less distinct, I
wouldn't have a problem.  When the unread articles were black, I could
see them easily, but now they just blur into with read ones.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> normal face does appear but only on articles that have absolutely no
> marks.  So if you tick several articles because they appear
> interesting, you loose the warning that those articles are unavailable
> while offline.

Still haven't tried Simons patch, but will shortly...

Kevin, wouldn't it make more sense to use summary-format to provide
warning as to [un]downloaded status?  Using the face overpowers
potentially usefull faces on undownloaded messages in groups where
the user doesn't intend to download but does intend to read. 

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[David Abrahams]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>
> --- gnus-sum.el.~6.342.~	Tue Apr 29 02:44:20 2003
> +++ gnus-sum.el	Fri May  2 14:16:54 2003
> @@ -902,12 +902,6 @@
>  (defcustom gnus-summary-highlight
>    '(((eq mark gnus-canceled-mark)
>       . gnus-summary-cancelled-face)
> -    ((and uncached (> score default-high))
> -     . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face)
> -    ((and uncached (< score default-low))
> -     . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face)
> -    (uncached
> -     . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face)
>      ((and (> score default-high)
>  	  (or (eq mark gnus-dormant-mark)
>  	      (eq mark gnus-ticked-mark)))
> @@ -935,6 +929,12 @@
>       . gnus-summary-high-read-face)
>      ((< score default-low)
>       . gnus-summary-low-read-face)
> +    ((and uncached (> score default-high))
> +     . gnus-summary-high-undownloaded-face)
> +    ((and uncached (< score default-low))
> +     . gnus-summary-low-undownloaded-face)
> +    (uncached
> +     . gnus-summary-normal-undownloaded-face)
>      (t
>       . gnus-summary-normal-read-face))
>    "*Controls the highlighting of summary buffer lines.
>

I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was.


-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Simon Josefsson]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>
> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was.

For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead
of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost
identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[David Abrahams]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>
>>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
>>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
>>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>>
>> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was.
>
> For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead
> of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost
> identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages.

That's what it does for me, too.  What I meant was I'm not sure what
it's doing *technically*.  If moving those Sexprs down makes them
ineffectual, can't they be eliminated?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Simon Josefsson]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>>
>>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
>>>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
>>>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>>>
>>> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was.
>>
>> For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead
>> of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost
>> identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages.
>
> That's what it does for me, too.  What I meant was I'm not sure what
> it's doing *technically*.  If moving those Sexprs down makes them
> ineffectual, can't they be eliminated?

Ah.  But it still has priority over the read mark.  So if you have a
read, undownloaded, article it will be marked with the undownloaded
face instead of the read face.  However, if the article is unread (or
ticked, or ...), you will see the unread (or tick, or ...) face,
instead of the undownloaded face.

Wasn't undownloaded articles marked with a @ or % mark or something
before?  Do people care about the downloadedness of articles?  I
don't.

If you select the article, you'll notice it is either there or not,
and until I want to read the article, I don't care if it exists
locally or not.  But if I want to read it, having it marked in a
special color isn't going to help me, since the article still doesn't
exist locally.

Hm. I must be missing some kind of use people make of the face.

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Hm. I must be missing some kind of use people make of the face.

At one time I was a heavy user of the agent.  I can tell you that it
can be confusing in a group that you read both on and off line.  I
often had to back up and download a message that I had read on line
but never downloaded.  Back then you couldn't tell.  It just showed
read. (While online) So I can see some value in somekind of indicator.
that is present even when online. What I take issue with is again
related to reading both on and off line on the same server.

The undownloaded face server to show whether something is written to
disk or not, but I think it should not over shadow other usefull
marks one might want to use.  So, I wonder if there is isn't some
other way to indicate downloadedness.  Not use a face at all.

Kai says that is orthogonal thinking.  Running at right angles I guess
he means, or talking apples and oranges.  But can't we use something
in summary format line to indicate the downloadedness of an article
and just drop the undownloaded faces?

As Kevin pointed out that last part can be done by removing the 3
default cons cells pertaining to downloadedness at
gnus-summary-highlight.  That returns you to pre downloaded face
behavior, which I favor.  But since I see usefullness in knowing
downloadedness can't we do it another way that doesn't use an all
powerfull face?

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kevin Greiner]

Harry Putnam <hgp@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> Hm. I must be missing some kind of use people make of the face.
>
> At one time I was a heavy user of the agent.  I can tell you that it
> can be confusing in a group that you read both on and off line.  I
> often had to back up and download a message that I had read on line
> but never downloaded.  Back then you couldn't tell.  It just showed
> read. (While online) So I can see some value in somekind of indicator.
> that is present even when online. What I take issue with is again
> related to reading both on and off line on the same server.

FYI, I am working on a group parameter that will provide fine-grain
control over which groups display the undownloaded faces.  Aside from
turning the faces on/off, the undownloaded faces will still function
as they do now.

> The undownloaded face server to show whether something is written to
> disk or not, but I think it should not over shadow other usefull
> marks one might want to use.  So, I wonder if there is isn't some
> other way to indicate downloadedness.  Not use a face at all.

Yes. Kai developed a format indicator at the same time that I worked
on the face solution.

> Kai says that is orthogonal thinking.  Running at right angles I guess
> he means, or talking apples and oranges.  But can't we use something
> in summary format line to indicate the downloadedness of an article
> and just drop the undownloaded faces?
>
> As Kevin pointed out that last part can be done by removing the 3
> default cons cells pertaining to downloadedness at
> gnus-summary-highlight.  That returns you to pre downloaded face
> behavior, which I favor.  But since I see usefullness in knowing
> downloadedness can't we do it another way that doesn't use an all
> powerfull face?

Now, you're coming closer to the problem.  What you're seeing as
arbitrary choices on my part are actually the result of constraints
imposed by the existing framework.

The summary format line, by virtue of being a string, makes it trivial
to extend its capabilities.  The downside is that 1) if I changed the
default, I'd annoy everyone as even unagentized summary buffers would
show a new column, and 2) those people who had already customized the
format line would have to read the manual to discover the new
feature. So, we have a new format but you have to go looking for it to
take advantage of it.

The face selection is handled by gnus-summary-highlight.  It's an
alist of conditions and face symbols.  It functions just like the cond
function.  The first non-nil condition will select the face.  This
structure is rarely customized as you're specifying both the face and
the precidence of faces.

In my opinion, this mechanism needs to be rewritten.  One of my first
releases of the undownloaded face was just that, one face.  A number
of people were upset that undownloaded articles hid the score faces so
I went back and created the high/low undownloade faces (3 faces
total).  Now, you would like to see a read/unread status (6 faces
total), ticked/unticked (12 faces total), etc. (Aren't permutations
fun :) ).  This is an option, but one that makes it difficult for
individuals to customize Gnus to a new color-scheme.

What we need is a highlight structure that specifies face attributes
(bold/italic/normal, red/green/blue, etc.) then matches on multiple
conditions.  Of course, we'd then need some sort of face engine to
find/create a face for each combination of attributes.  Anyone know of
one?

Kevin

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Harry Putnam]

Kevin Greiner <kgreiner@xpediantsolutions.com> writes:

> FYI, I am working on a group parameter that will provide fine-grain
> control over which groups display the undownloaded faces.  Aside from
> turning the faces on/off, the undownloaded faces will still function
> as they do now.

Egad... I'm beginning to see the complexities now.. Thanks for the
walk thru.  Your solution above looks like one way to please most
people. Even me..  If I'm following your thinking here, this would be
a ready made Gp entry that would turn on the (current)  undowloaded
face behavior.  If left off one would have the behavior that existed
before your work on undownloaded faces.

Untill such time as the complex choice engine you describe might be
invented, this looks like a happy solution.  Maybe not even too hard.

Maybe something in Gp that just removes the 3 cons cells? 

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[David Abrahams]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>
>>> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> I sent a message asking for opinions about this a few months ago, but
>>>>> now that I try to find my message, I note that it contained a screen
>>>>> shot so it was probably rejected due to size.  So:  Opinions?
>>>>
>>>> I'm likin' it, though I don't exactly understand what the effect was.
>>>
>>> For me, it makes unread (and ticked, and ...) articles black instead
>>> of a green-blue-ish (undownloadable mark) color which looks almost
>>> identical to the green-blue-ish color which is used for read messages.
>>
>> That's what it does for me, too.  What I meant was I'm not sure what
>> it's doing *technically*.  If moving those Sexprs down makes them
>> ineffectual, can't they be eliminated?
>
> Ah.  But it still has priority over the read mark.  So if you have a
> read, undownloaded, article it will be marked with the undownloaded
> face instead of the read face.  However, if the article is unread (or
> ticked, or ...), you will see the unread (or tick, or ...) face,
> instead of the undownloaded face.
>
> Wasn't undownloaded articles marked with a @ or % mark or something
> before?  Do people care about the downloadedness of articles?  I
> don't.

I care a little.  I sometimes go away from my network connection and
want to take a record of some conversations with me.


-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: Overbearing undownloaded face

[Kai Großjohann]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> If you select the article, you'll notice it is either there or not,
> and until I want to read the article, I don't care if it exists
> locally or not.  But if I want to read it, having it marked in a
> special color isn't going to help me, since the article still doesn't
> exist locally.

I thhink people who are online might appreciate the indication.  Then
they know which articles still need to be marked for download.

-- 
file-error; Data: (Opening input file no such file or directory ~/.signature)