Re: B DEL is being treated as expiry?

[Karl Kleinpaste <karl@charcoal.com>]

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
> The current situation is better than before Nevin's change, 

No, it isn't, because it used to be the case that when I said, "delete
this," *it was deleted*.  Perhaps there was some flaw in how deletion
was done, but *at least articles went away* as ordered.  It makes no
sense to say, "the current situation is better, now that the basic
operation of the function in question is to do something completely
foreign to what the function is designed and advertised to do."

> because before Nevin's change, _some_ parameters got respected and
> others didn't.  So depending on how you set expiry-target, B DEL
> would respect it.  Now at least it's consistent.

The only group parameter consistency that has meaning here is to
ignore them all, because the article is going away forever, and the
ongoing operation of group parameters can have no meaning for an
article file which doesn't even exist.

At the very least, the change which induced expiry should be reverted
so that we get deletions back.