Re: NoCeM flakiness in 0.74 and higher

[Sudish Joseph <sudish@mindspring.com>]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:
> Can't you just remove a.n.m from `gnus-nocem-groups'?

I did.  But from what I posted, isn't it indicative of a (pretty
scary) bug?  Namely that gnus has lost track of what articles it has
already seen.

>> In particular, it'd be neat if one could have an alist that let you
>> specify the type of score entry you want generated for articles
>> that're being eliminated by nocem.  A followup entry (I.e., low score
>> on references) would be the most useful.

> Yes, that would be useful.  It might be tricky to implement in an
> efficient fashion, though.

It could as simple as providing a variable, gnus-nocem-scorefile.  If
non-nil, nocem handling in done via score files.  Instead of inserting
msg-id's in News/NoCeM/cache, insert a "followup" entry in this
scorefile.  

The user is free to have that scorefile used in whatever groups they
see fit, using any of the many options gnus provides.  I, for example,
would add a 'files entry for it in all.SCORE.

The nice thing of doing it this way is that I can run a -batch nocem
process w/o ever having to worry about coming up with lightweight
locking for NoCeM/active.  Do a score file cache flush and you have
the latest scorefile.

Of course, if the user ever decides to use that scorefile in another
context, all bets are off.  

Hmm, to address David's worry about the size of the resulting
scorefile: if this method remains as simple as only allowing score
entries of one type (it might be followup or subject, but fixed), we
can even do it w/o changing the format of NoCeM/active.

We'd need to add some form of score-file handler hook that lets us
treat that file as a normal scorefile and massage it's data into
normal score format at the time it gets read into the score cache --
not hard or time intensive, each entry is of the same format.  Note
that not treating it as a scorefile would mean all types of kluges to
allow concurrent -batch access and would be a lose, IMO.

Enough fantasizing for today.
Later,
-Sudish