From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9238 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sudish Joseph Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: NoCeM flakiness in 0.74 and higher Date: 17 Dec 1996 16:13:13 -0500 Sender: sj@atreides.mindspring.com Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149292 17260 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:28:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:28:12 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from riker.diamond-lane.net (root@riker [206.190.83.4]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id NAA29140 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 13:36:10 -0800 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by riker.diamond-lane.net (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id NAA32203 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 13:40:45 -0800 Original-Received: from atreides.mindspring.com (qmailr@atreides.mindspring.com [204.180.142.236]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 22:13:11 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 10993 invoked by uid 52477); 17 Dec 1996 21:13:13 -0000 Original-To: The Ding List In-Reply-To: David Moore's message of 17 Dec 1996 11:36:50 -0800 Original-Lines: 59 X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.76/XEmacs 20.0 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9238 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9238 In article , David Moore writes: > some messages in them to allow a smoother transition. You can certainly > remove the two old names from the list if the new ones have arrived at > your site. Cool, I'll zap n.a.n.a as well. Tx. >> Here's where I stopped gnus: >> Checking article 25608 in alt.nocem.misc for NoCeM... >> Good signature from user "AutoMoose1 (Automated Cancelmoose)". >> Verifying... > If it was stuck verifying, you could always (setq > gnus-nocem-verifier nil). This is also substantially faster, at the > cost that someone might forge a nocem posting. Oops, I should've been clearer. It isn't hanging--it's reading articles that it's marked as read in NoCeM/active. The entry for alt.nocem.misc in my orig post is ("alt.nocem.misc" (25378 . 26700)). But it's verifying article 25608 above. > I've been thinking about a batch interface also, and might do it > since I'm thinking of rewriting some of the nocem code to support some > things in the soon to be official nocem BNF and prototype rfc. Yay! Much power to you. :-) > Yeah, that might work. :) But I still haven't tried using > scoring at all, hmm, maybe some time when xemacs stabilizes a bit. You might want to look at it before you do anything to gnus-nocem.el. The best part of the whole scoring interface/implementation is that it's so damned flexible (bows deeply in the direction of Per and Lars). In particular, using it for any data whose sole purpose is article purging/selection is a win in many ways: easier/better to reuse (great) code, users may use the existing score file interface to manipulate this data, less formats used for data the better, score processing is extremely fast, etc. > There is no subject information available in the nocem control > messages, only message id. So you'd have to score on that. I was thinking in terms of generating a subject score entry at the time the actual article was encountered during scoring. Since we have the whole xref record, getting the subject is easy. The (big) drawback is that we'd need a new score field type (exactly like 'followup 'cept that it lowers the subject score). A new score type would be perfect for references as well: 'nocem might mean kill this article and generate a "lower on references" entry. Not a big deal. A flat "lower all nocem'ed articles on msg-id and references" is plentiful. I wouldn't use Subject: anyway, and I doubt many would. Argh, I'm running speculatively at the mouth again, -Sudish