From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/4396 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: jvinson@cheux.ecs.umass.edu (Jack Vinson) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: cached articles Date: 14 Dec 1995 09:28:35 -0500 Organization: University of Massachusetts Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035145148 29460 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:19:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:19:08 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id HAA23098 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 07:09:27 -0800 Original-Received: from cheux.ecs.umass.edu (cheux.ecs.umass.edu [128.119.82.11]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 15:34:02 +0100 Original-Received: by cheux.ecs.umass.edu (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA28740; Thu, 14 Dec 1995 09:28:41 -0500 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no Original-Lines: 16 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4396 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4396 Can someone clear up what we've done to article caching? In the past if we had article caching turned on and marked an article with ! or ? (tick or dormant) that article would be cached so that it didn't disappear when the group went through its expiry process. Now it sounds like we have broken this behavior by creating a separate mark (*) which will automagically cache an article. Is this the case? If so, this means that I have to remember to cache articles that I might want to keep around instead of ticking them, correct? -- Jonathan "Jack" Vinson jvinson@cheux.ecs.umass.edu Sunderland, MA "Churchill was a shopping bag" - Fatima Mansions