* Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > Steve Youngs writes: >> No, that'd suck. Each bug should be a thread within the group that is >> the "product". We have 2 "products" in our Bugzilla, so you'd have >> something like... > Hm... the problem then would be things like "I want to see all the > messages in bug #542, but not any others in the same product > category". With the one-group-per-bug approach, that would be `C-u > RET', while with the one-group-per-product, it would require a > separate special command. `/ s' solves that for one-group-per-product. > And if you're not interested in a bug, you just kill the group. > Etc. one-group-per-product would just use scoring here. > Of course, it helps if you use topics and all the new bugzilla groups > end up there automatically. Also helps if you hook the find-new-groups func into something so these thousands of new groups appear automatically. BTW, suppose I was a Mozilla developer... your one-group-per-bug means I could have anywhere up to 300000 groups in my Gnus!! That's just insane. -- |---------------------| | I am Dyslexic of Borg. | | Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. | |---------------------------------------|