* Re: gnu linux clients capable of virtual groups
[not found] ` <k3p7o0$764$1@n102.xanadu-bbs.net>
@ 2012-09-25 3:35 ` Ivan Shmakov
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Ivan Shmakov @ 2012-09-25 3:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: info-gnus-english
>>>>> John F Morse <john@example.invalid> writes:
>>>>> Anonymous wrote:
[Cross-posting to news:gnu.emacs.gnus.]
[...]
>> I'll describe the problem, rather than the solution. When a user is
>> subscribed to 100 newsgroups, it is *very* cumbersome to visit each
>> newsgroup to see if there is anything interesting on a daily basis.
[...]
>> Those would be "virtual" newsgroups, because the user creates them
>> and only the client knows about them, not the outside world.
>> It's a bit of a surprise that Windows clients (which tend to cater
>> for simple one-click users) have clients that can configure virtual
>> newsgroups, while text-based gnu linux tools are falling short on
>> the power and configurability.
> That might be possible, but I'm unaware of any newsreader, Linux, Mac
> or Windows that can do such a thing.
Gnus (which runs on top of Emacs) can do it, and is available
for all the mentioned platforms. This feature is accessed via
the M-x gnus-group-make-empty-virtual and M-x
gnus-group-add-to-virtual commands in the *Groups* buffer.
[...]
> For someone who does read a lot of articles, from many newsgroups,
> this would certainly generate a lot of confusion. Sorting by date
> and time would wreck any thread display with everything intermixed.
Huh?
[...]
> One possible trouble would be replying. The newsreader would need to
> know the real newsgroup so it could post back into it. Perhaps by
> evaluating the disposition of the reply by using the Newsgroups:
> header field.
Due to the support of cross-posting in Usenet, it's not only
"virtual" groups that need such a feature, as when posting a
follow-up to a cross-posted article, the currently selected
group won't be the only one the follow needs to go to.
Furthermore, should an article be selected, e. g., by traversing
References: (which Gnus allows one to do), it may happen that
the current article doesn't belong to the current group at all.
> Again, threading could be a nightmare without using the References:
> header field.
? I don't know of any sensible way to thread, other than by
relying on References:.
[...]
--
FSF associate member #7257
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread