Re: Should archive server add Message-IDs to the cache?

[Sudish Joseph <sj@eng.mindspring.net>]

Kai Grossjohann writes:
> I don't use archive servers, but I feel that the copy that's *not* in
> the archive server should be considered the "original" and that the
> copy in the archive server should be considered the "duplicate".  This
> would mean that you won't be surprised about articles disappearing.

The archive server should have nothing to do with duplicate
detection.  Those messages are stored for a separate purpose, outside
of your normal message reading.  They aren't normal messages, at least
the way I use them.

> OTOH, though, deleting messages in the archive server isn't really
> what you want, either, since then it wouldn't be an archive any
> longer.

Nothing gets deleted from the archive server.  Quite the opposite,
it'll contain the only copy of your message in the gnus system (other
than the one in mail.duplicates).  

This breaks stuff like threading, "^", etc. in mailing list groups.  I
also find myself have to go and check the archive and duplicates
groups to see if the message even made it through.

Here's the picture.

rgnus                              gnus-5.4.22+ (and possibly earlier)
-----                              ------------
1 copy in archive                  1 copy in archive
1 copy in list group               1 copy in duplicates


Also, any funnction/backend/hook/whathaveyou that uses
nnml-request-accept-article from now on will add bogus entries into
the duplicate cache.


I guess the easy workaround for me is to turn off gnus' duplicate
detection and rely on external filters to weed out duplicates.

Eww,
-Sudish