From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/26444 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Justin Sheehy Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Confused about crosspost marking behavior. Date: 08 Nov 1999 19:27:24 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87eme8dvqi.fsf_-_@raven.localnet> <8766zjeami.fsf@raven.localnet> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035163652 19416 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 01:27:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 01:27:32 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from lisa.math.uh.edu (lisa.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.49]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA08976 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 19:27:56 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by lisa.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAB31100; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 18:27:55 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 08 Nov 1999 18:28:08 -0600 (CST) 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 SAA18301 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 18:27:58 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from amber.ccs.neu.edu (root@amber.ccs.neu.edu [129.10.116.51]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA08966 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 19:27:27 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from betelgeuse.ccs.neu.edu (dworkin@betelgeuse.ccs.neu.edu [129.10.116.100]) by amber.ccs.neu.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA14016 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 19:27:26 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from dworkin@localhost) by betelgeuse.ccs.neu.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id TAA14360; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 19:27:25 -0500 (EST) Original-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 45 User-Agent: Gnus/5.07009701 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.97.1) XEmacs/20.4 (Emerald) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:26444 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:26444 Rob Browning writes: > Right. If you're not using total-expire, this behavior means that > you're going to slowly accumulate a set of read articles that should > have been deleted in the crossposted groups. This makes the "&" > split-fancy operatory less useful. > > I'm really beginning to suspect that Gnus just really wants me to use > total-expire and get used to it. Sounds like a good idea to me. :-) I've actually always found auto-expire to seem like a very ugly concept when compared to total-expire, but that may just be me. I also haven't yet seen a situation where I thought it made more sense to use auto-expire than total-expire. > Right. I just keep getting this feeling that the whole total/auto > expire process isn't quite right. Well, I think that combining them can lead to confusion, but just as long as you only use one or the other it is pretty straightforward. > How about this? > 1) Make the expire mark orthogonal to the other marks. In other > words, an article can be both read and expired Isn't this already the case? From looking at my newsrc.eld, it seems to be. But then, that was simply from a one-time test. I never think about the expirable mark in normal situations. :-) [snip rest of suggestions] > Is this actually an improvement? It seems clearer to me, but how > about to others? As I said before, I haven't yet seen the situation where auto-expire really made much sense. To me, the simplest answer is always just 'use total-expire, it makes sense'. -Justin