From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/24987 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Crellin Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: online vs offline available articles conflict resolution Date: 01 Sep 1999 14:54:21 -0700 Organization: Cadabra Inc. | Comparison Shopping | http://cadabra.com/ Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035162456 11676 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 01:07:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 01:07:36 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from spinoza.math.uh.edu (spinoza.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.18]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA25079 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 17:57:31 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by spinoza.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAB25240; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 16:57:15 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 01 Sep 1999 16:57:02 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA21360 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 16:56:53 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from webtile.wallaby.cc (webtile.wallaby.cc [209.19.206.74]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA24983 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 17:54:46 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by webtile.wallaby.cc (Postfix, from userid 6077) id 916BD6277A; Wed, 1 Sep 1999 14:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 29 User-Agent: Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) Emacs/20.3 Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:24987 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:24987 I've just been burnt both ways by this and am wondering if there can't be some sort of optional warning to prevent it or at least make it less painful. Online beating offline: If I haven't done a "J s" recently enough and accidentally enter a group for which I've seen article numbers online I've not read, gnus treats them as if already expired I guess, and I have a devil of a time finding which articles I hadn't already read next time I'm online. Offline beating online: This can cause the same problem in reverse. Having diligently loaded the Agent for several weeks but having no time to catch up in fa.linux.kernel, I could pleasantly read through the last 10k articles offline at my leisure. Today I entered the group while online, and the server only has 1.5k articles and gnus updated my number of unread articles due to the articles expired on the server. Presumably I can still go back and read them offline after some pain, but I wish I didn't have to keep getting caught in one or other of these contortions. Is there some way of making this less painful? Perhaps if visiting groups while offline there were some metadatum kept regarding the last known to be downloaded article the Agent grabbed, and not killing anything in a range past that? What about the other way? When there are unread articles available in the Agent but not on the server, it seems a crime to mark those as expired and unavailable. -- Neil Crellin