Re: backporting bugfixes to the v5-10 branch

[Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc>]

On Wed, Jul 12 2006, Andreas Seltenreich wrote:

> I just reviewed the v5-10 branch with respect to my recent bugfixes in
> the trunk, and the following would be applicable to the stable branch,
> too:
> 	* nnweb.el (nnweb-google-parse-1): Update regexp for author and date.
> 	(nnweb-google-search): Respect nnweb-max-hits as upper bound.
>
> 	* gnus-srvr.el (gnus-browse-unsubscribe-group): Don't subscribe
> 	unsubscribed groups as if they were killed ones.  It causes duplicate
> 	entries in gnus-newsrc-alist.
>
> 	* mm-url.el (mm-url-insert-file-contents): Don't set Connection: Close.
>
> Any objections to backporting them?

Feel free to backport to v5-10 if you consider the fixes stable
enough.

> I'm not sure what to do with the change to gnus-find-method-for-group:
>
> 	* gnus.el (gnus-find-method-for-group): On killed/unknown groups, try
> 	looking up the method using GROUP's prefix before inventing a new one.
> 	It is used on killed/unknown groups in various places where returning
> 	an all-new method isn't expected by the caller.
>
> While I can reproduce all of the bugs listed in
> <news:87fyhttsum.fsf@gate450.dyndns.org> on a stable Gnus, 

... and the fix as well, I guess?

> the fix depends on the macro gnus-group-server, which doesn't exists
> on the v5-10 branch.  Maybe just inling its code is more appropriate
> than adding the macro to v5-10?

I'd suggest to add the macro to v5-10 as well.  It makes the code more
readable and simplifies comparing the different branches.

> I'm afraid the alternative to changing gnus-find-method-for-group
> would be to locate all places where it could be called on killed
> groups, and possibly fixing those.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/