From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/44745 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: funny problems with nnmail-cache and split-fancy-with-parent Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 17:22:02 +0200 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87offy9v9p.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> <87vga5xnfc.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> <87n0vh13er.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> <87r8ko822k.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> <87n0vc81rz.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020785128 12986 127.0.0.1 (7 May 2002 15:25:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 15:25:28 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 1756qF-0003NL-00 for ; Tue, 07 May 2002 17:25:28 +0200 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1756np-0005FZ-00; Tue, 07 May 2002 10:22:57 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Tue, 07 May 2002 10:23:12 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA08070 for ; Tue, 7 May 2002 10:23:00 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (qmail 10579 invoked by alias); 7 May 2002 15:22:36 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 10574 invoked from network); 7 May 2002 15:22:35 -0000 Original-Received: from waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de (129.217.4.42) by gnus.org with SMTP; 7 May 2002 15:22:35 -0000 Original-Received: from lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lothlorien [129.217.19.67]) by waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de with ESMTP id g47FM7b14033 for ; Tue, 7 May 2002 17:22:08 +0200 (MES) Original-Received: from lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lucy [129.217.19.80]) by lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de id RAA15309; Tue, 7 May 2002 17:22:02 +0200 (MET DST) Original-Received: by lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix, from userid 6104) id 871B03AF2F; Tue, 7 May 2002 17:22:02 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <87n0vc81rz.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> (Josh Huber's message of "Tue, 07 May 2002 10:34:40 -0400") Original-Lines: 38 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090007 (Oort Gnus v0.07) Emacs/21.2.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44745 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44745 Josh Huber writes: > Josh Huber writes: > >> Works for me, but after looking at this -- shouldn't there be a >> better interface into nnmail-cache-insert? We should go through and >> find all the places which call it, which is only 10 places, and use >> the optional argument for group name if possible. checking for >> bound symbols and using heuristics to get the group name seems a >> little hackish to me ;) (no offense to Kai!) No offense taken. I now remember the feeling when writing the code. It is not a pleasant memory :-) > Of course, I spoke too soon here. The reason this was done became > apartent while looking at nnmail-check-duplication, which has no > knowledge of the group. > > Perhaps something a little more generic for splitting could be done? > bind gnus-current-split-group or something like that? Yes. Lars has said (years ago) that he just wants to define some symbols which are bound and document them. So why not do that now. We need to find all places which call nnmail-check-duplication, then frob them. Alas, I now use nnimap which doesn't use that code. Any takers for testing it, at least? > Perhaps we should just ignore it ;) > > What do you think about moving the priority of the symbol checking > (the diff in the parent). If it works for you, it's probably Good Stuff. kai -- Silence is foo!