Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

Let's say that I need to post some message on two groups on usenet,
say hierarchy.group1 & hierarchy.group2.

I then use `Newsgroups: ' and type `hiearchy.group1,hiearchy.group2'

* Why is Gnus repeatedly asking me if there are any follow-ups to my
* message? What are these?
* Is my way to specify the different posting groups (i.e. with a
* comma) correct? When trying to post to multiple groups, it never
* works, but when I use only one group, it works. Why?

Thanks.
- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

To accomplish great things, we must not only act, but also dream; not
 only plan but also believe. (Anatole France)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvkOegACgkQM0LLzLt8MhxJ4ACfYwlIBYx6Q+n8sEHdZcc6TD8h
JYEAnRTwFx+mx2mflXxcdOc6aypOCzhz
=Uz38
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Fri, 07 May 2010 18:03:52 +0200, Merciadri wrote:

> I then use `Newsgroups: ' and type `hiearchy.group1,hiearchy.group2'

> * Why is Gnus repeatedly asking me if there are any follow-ups to my
> * message? What are these?

Gnus is asking you what group to put in the Followup-To header, which
allows you to indicate in which of the groups you are posting to the
discussion (any followups) should be directed to.

Crossposting is often not a good idea.

> * Is my way to specify the different posting groups (i.e. with a
> * comma) correct? When trying to post to multiple groups, it never
> * works, but when I use only one group, it works. Why?

What do you mean "it never works"? Descrive what happens...


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "we push onward. to you, it is 2005, to us, it is            Adam Sjøgren
  2011. we are always far ahead."                        asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Fri, 07 May 2010 20:12:41 +0200, Adam wrote:

> What do you mean "it never works"? Descrive what happens...
                                           ^
                                           b

My followup to your article was crossposted to gnu.emacs.gnus and the
Danish test-group dk.test, as you can see here:

 * http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.emacs.gnus/msg/be80a18eb8f60975
 * http://groups.google.com/group/dk.test/msg/be80a18eb8f60975


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "we push onward. to you, it is 2005, to us, it is            Adam Sjøgren
  2011. we are always far ahead."                        asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

> On Fri, 07 May 2010 20:12:41 +0200, Adam wrote:
>
>> What do you mean "it never works"? Descrive what happens...
>                                            ^
>                                            b
>
> My followup to your article was crossposted to gnu.emacs.gnus and the
> Danish test-group dk.test, as you can see here:
>
>  * http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.emacs.gnus/msg/be80a18eb8f60975
>  * http://groups.google.com/group/dk.test/msg/be80a18eb8f60975
Thanks, good example. 

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

Life is what happens to you when you are busy making other
 plans. (John Lennon)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvkhB0ACgkQM0LLzLt8MhxshgCfR2M9UJY1ryN/CnSRVGwC17/2
VEsAnj8GFPtVtgOmu5Nou14zDywAGuTt
=T+cf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

> On Fri, 07 May 2010 18:03:52 +0200, Merciadri wrote:
>
>> I then use `Newsgroups: ' and type `hiearchy.group1,hiearchy.group2'
>
>> * Why is Gnus repeatedly asking me if there are any follow-ups to my
>> * message? What are these?
>
> Gnus is asking you what group to put in the Followup-To header, which
> allows you to indicate in which of the groups you are posting to the
> discussion (any followups) should be directed to.
Okay. But giving nothing for followups should not prevent Gnus from
sending the article to the precited groups, should it?

> Crossposting is often not a good idea.
I know, but this was really justified here. (If it was not, I would
not have even tried it.)

>> * Is my way to specify the different posting groups (i.e. with a
>> * comma) correct? When trying to post to multiple groups, it never
>> * works, but when I use only one group, it works. Why?
>
> What do you mean "it never works"? Descrive what happens...
What happens is simple: an article (/thread) is never created in any
of the two groups that I specified in `Newsgroups'. But if I
individually send the article to each group, it appears in both
groups.

Why? Thanks.
- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

Liberty without learning is always in peril; learning without liberty
 is always in vain. (John F. Kennedy)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvkhBAACgkQM0LLzLt8MhxsBwCfQc1FQksQ+a06i5p69DE+YryG
1QkAoKAHZxV1SghmcmTfaZeGarDRmqiJ
=TNo3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Fri, 07 May 2010 23:20:16 +0200, Merciadri wrote:

> Okay. But giving nothing for followups should not prevent Gnus from
> sending the article to the precited groups, should it?

Correct.

>> What do you mean "it never works"? Descrive what happens...

> What happens is simple: an article (/thread) is never created in any
> of the two groups that I specified in `Newsgroups'.

Do you get any error messages? Perhaps the administrator of the
news-server you use do not like crossposts.

> Why? Thanks.

Hard to tell without any information from you about what happens.

You could try ngrep and see if you can learn something by looking at the
interaction with the news-server. NNTP is quite straight-forward.


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "we push onward. to you, it is 2005, to us, it is            Adam Sjøgren
  2011. we are always far ahead."                        asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

> Do you get any error messages?
No, everything happens as habitually on my end: the same sending
messages, everything looks right, but nothing is actually posted.

> Perhaps the administrator of the
> news-server you use do not like crossposts.
That's possible.

>
>> Why? Thanks.
>
> Hard to tell without any information from you about what happens.
I don't know what I could say on the top of this.

> You could try ngrep and see if you can learn something by looking at the
> interaction with the news-server. NNTP is quite straight-forward.
Okay. I'm going to do a test soon.

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

The voyage to discovery is not in seeking new landscapes but in having
 new eyes. (Marcel Proust)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvlY0kACgkQM0LLzLt8MhzLBwCcCJbsNqUxio0gHzl3terT5DOr
axwAn3OyOmB1LW5LKEa/XB4Tyw1oQ8tU
=D98I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This is a test. Should be sent to dk.test too.

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

Instruction ends in the schoolroom, but education ends only with
 life. (F. W. Robertson)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvlZB0ACgkQM0LLzLt8MhxhNgCeNcSk8TB9AzbjBrPbNBqtMrFI
QgkAnAlsu1M5h+vDbLwpv7gRxIeK6xt2
=96H3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Sat, 08 May 2010 15:16:13 +0200, Merciadri wrote:

> This is a test. Should be sent to dk.test too.

Please don't use this group for testing. Thanks.


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "we push onward. to you, it is 2005, to us, it is            Adam Sjøgren
  2011. we are always far ahead."                        asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Test6

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

You find out who your real friends are when you're involved in a
 scandal. (Elizabeth Taylor)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvmppgACgkQM0LLzLt8MhyeXQCeN3t7EERQ/vonFPScikQPkx7R
mZIAn2OyWOq9xhoBp8u+GtV9USnZ7mOf
=BWfm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

Same test.
- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

When love and skill work together, expect a masterpiece. (John
 Ruskin)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvlZEUACgkQM0LLzLt8MhyjjwCfbEP5euHuU+vK9C2BYwJOax9F
yVAAn1ATjLguHutfu5uyUdB02nc4aIgT
=E7UR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ok, everything worked fine for the two precedent tests (but none of
them was posted to dk.test, because this group is unknown to my NNTP),
and I had:

==
# ngrep port 119
interface: eth0 (192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0)
filter: (ip or ip6) and ( port 119 )
#
T 192.168.0.101:55801 -> 130.225.254.104:119 [AP]
  POST..                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
#
T 130.225.254.104:119 -> 192.168.0.101:55801 [AP]
  340 340 <4be5648f$0$273$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> (desired)..                                                                                                                                                                          
##
T 192.168.0.101:55801 -> 130.225.254.104:119 [A]
  Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.gnus,dk.test..Subject: Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?..References: <87fx2366mv.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA> <87pr17bmxy.fsf@topper.koldfront.dk> <878w7vxvcf.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRI
  LUCA> <87wrvf8jy5.fsf@topper.koldfront.dk>..From: Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be>..Organization: ULg..Date: Sat, 08 May 2010 15:16:53 +0200..Message-ID: <87k4rebkje.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA>..User-A
  gent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)..Cancel-Lock: sha1:NKNDXz3sPU1V2DYKPR+2LH4A30M=..MIME-Version: 1.0..Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8..Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit....-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----.
  .Hash: SHA1....asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sj..gren) writes:....Same test...- -- ..Merciadri Luca..See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/..- -- ....When love and skill work together, expect a masterpiece. (John.. Ruski
  n)..-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----..Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)..Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcryp                                                                                                           
#
T 192.168.0.101:55801 -> 130.225.254.104:119 [AP]
  t.sourceforge.net/>....iEYEARECAAYFAkvlZEUACgkQM0LLzLt8MhyjjwCfbEP5euHuU+vK9C2BYwJOax9F..yVAAn1ATjLguHutfu5uyUdB02nc4aIgT..=E7UR..-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----.....                                                                     
###
T 130.225.254.104:119 -> 192.168.0.101:55801 [AP]
  240 <87k4rebkje.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA> Article posted..                                                                                                                                                              
#^Cexit
9 received, 0 dropped
==

I am still unable to say why it does not work for the two groups given
in the OP. It might be because they both exist, but would it be that?
I do not want to try with known groups (such as linux.debian.user,
etc.), because it would pollute the group!

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

Life has taught us that love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together
   in the same direction. (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvlZS4ACgkQM0LLzLt8Mhz3MACgjgI/O8hB5gH+I7ouF+ND7wL+
LDoAn0//xurNQgGXOMVN032C+FuYbp2K
=mMgv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I just received an acknowledgment e-mail telling me that the message
on dk.test was received correctly. The problem seems then to appear
only when I am cross-posting on the two groups given in the
OP. Strange. Do not hesitate to ask me if you have other questions. Thanks.

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

We don't stop playing because we grow old;  we grow old because we
 stop playing. (George Bernard Shaw)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvlZicACgkQM0LLzLt8MhwHuwCfeER1A9z4TCAMogHOY3a25p6G
HL0AnjcOAEIOXwlbw/Zncq8eqp6vlz2e
=OIyg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Sat, 08 May 2010 15:20:48 +0200, Merciadri wrote:

> I am still unable to say why it does not work for the two groups given
> in the OP.

What groups was that?

In the original article you wrote:

  "Let's say that I need to post some message on two groups on usenet,
   say hierarchy.group1 & hierarchy.group2."

...

> It might be because they both exist, but would it be that?

That question does not parse for me.

> I do not want to try with known groups (such as linux.debian.user,
> etc.), because it would pollute the group!

But polluting gnu.emacs.gnus is just fine? Hrmpf.

linux.debian.user sounds more like a mailinglist than a usenet group to
me, but since you used made-up group names in the first article, it is
hard to say.

I think it is a fair guess that your problem isn't with Gnus.


  Best regards,

-- 
 "we push onward. to you, it is 2005, to us, it is            Adam Sjøgren
  2011. we are always far ahead."                        asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sorry Adam for being not precise.

asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

> On Sat, 08 May 2010 15:20:48 +0200, Merciadri wrote:
>
>> I am still unable to say why it does not work for the two groups given
>> in the OP.
>
> What groups was that?
>
> In the original article you wrote:
>
>   "Let's say that I need to post some message on two groups on usenet,
>    say hierarchy.group1 & hierarchy.group2."
>
> ...
Sorry, I was sure of having written some real groups. I tested with
linux.debian.user and comp.sys.hp48, together. These are groups which
my Gnus did not post the article to.

>> It might be because they both exist, but would it be that?
>
> That question does not parse for me.
I understand why you did not understand it. I had forgotten the
expression `to my news-gate', i.e. you should have read

==
It might be because they both exist to the news-gate, but would it be that?
==

The combination linux.debian.user + comp.sys.hp48 never works. That
is, each time I try to send an article to both groups, it is sent
nowhere. But I have only observed this behaviour with these two
groups.

>> I do not want to try with known groups (such as linux.debian.user,
>> etc.), because it would pollute the group!
>
> But polluting gnu.emacs.gnus is just fine? Hrmpf.
Not at all. The fact is that adding some `test' message to a
discussion is not really polluting, it even takes place in the
discussion. However, copying an answer of an already-launched
dicussion on another usenet group makes it appear as a new article,
which is clearly polluting. Don't you agree?

> linux.debian.user sounds more like a mailinglist than a usenet group to
> me, but since you used made-up group names in the first article, it is
> hard to say.
Yes, but posting to the ML or posting to the usenet group sends the
message to the other, so that both are synchronized.

> I think it is a fair guess that your problem isn't with Gnus.
You might be thinking this because I was so unprecise that I was
looking incompetent, and that, to my level, Gnus should not be
bugging, and the error would only come from the user, i.e. me. If it
is that, no problem, I understand that I should have been more
precise. If it is not that, what would it be coming from? I have
currently only one set of two groups which do not like to receive the same
article in same time.

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

Many receive advice; only the wise profit from it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvlxXAACgkQM0LLzLt8Mhwy+gCfYFsCCYiWYnSE3OmKEA7REajT
FOMAn35t5SiGqFZkXcpxF78Y37yn0edu
=Hn2t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Sat, 08 May 2010 22:11:28 +0200, Merciadri wrote:

> Sorry Adam for being not precise.

No worries :-)

> I tested with linux.debian.user and comp.sys.hp48, together.

Both on news.dotsrc.org, or?

> It might be because they both exist to the news-gate, but would it be
> that?

I still don't quite understand what you mean by this. I would expect
that they _both_ _had_ to exist on the news server you use for it to
work.

What is this "news-gate" you mention?

> The combination linux.debian.user + comp.sys.hp48 never works. That
> is, each time I try to send an article to both groups, it is sent
> nowhere. But I have only observed this behaviour with these two
> groups.

It is quite odd that you don't get an error back from the news server, I
think.

> Not at all. The fact is that adding some `test' message to a
> discussion is not really polluting, it even takes place in the
> discussion. However, copying an answer of an already-launched
> dicussion on another usenet group makes it appear as a new article,
> which is clearly polluting. Don't you agree?

Not really, no. I think testing should be done in dedicated test groups
only, regardless of whether you test within a thread or create a new
one.

>> linux.debian.user sounds more like a mailinglist than a usenet group to
>> me, but since you used made-up group names in the first article, it is
>> hard to say.

> Yes, but posting to the ML or posting to the usenet group sends the
> message to the other, so that both are synchronized.

I was about to guess that the software that does this news<->email
gating perhaps discards crossposts, but I would have expected your
missing article to have reached the other newsgroup at least, then.

Given that you can see Gnus deliver the article to the server and the
server doesn't give you an error back, I still think the problem isn't
with Gnus and how you use it.


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "Det er jo bare punk, forklædt som Bubbers badekar!"         Adam Sjøgren
                                                         asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

> On Sat, 08 May 2010 22:11:28 +0200, Merciadri wrote:
>
>> Sorry Adam for being not precise.
>
> No worries :-)
:-)

>> I tested with linux.debian.user and comp.sys.hp48, together.
>
> Both on news.dotsrc.org, or?
>
>> It might be because they both exist to the news-gate, but would it be
>> that?
>
> I still don't quite understand what you mean by this. I would expect
> that they _both_ _had_ to exist on the news server you use for it to
> work.
They need to exist to be able to receive a message, clearly. But I
firstly thought that if the news-gate received a message to post to at
least two groups, it checked firstly if they existed, and then, if
they were to exist, it posted nothing. If only one were to exist, the
news-gate would then have posted the message to the only one which
exists.

Note that by `existing,' I mean `existing on the news-gate.' Many
well-known Usenet groups are unavailable to my news-gate. Dunno why.

> What is this "news-gate" you mention?
news.sunsite.dk. Sorry, I thought it was written in the headers.

>> The combination linux.debian.user + comp.sys.hp48 never works. That
>> is, each time I try to send an article to both groups, it is sent
>> nowhere. But I have only observed this behaviour with these two
>> groups.
>
> It is quite odd that you don't get an error back from the news server, I
> think.
Yes. And thus, as you say, the problem should not come from then. But
why, then, would posting individually to the two groups, work? I
tested it directly after, and it worked.

>> Not at all. The fact is that adding some `test' message to a
>> discussion is not really polluting, it even takes place in the
>> discussion. However, copying an answer of an already-launched
>> dicussion on another usenet group makes it appear as a new article,
>> which is clearly polluting. Don't you agree?
>
> Not really, no. I think testing should be done in dedicated test groups
> only, regardless of whether you test within a thread or create a new
> one.
I knew no other test group available on my news-gate than dk.test. :-(

>>> linux.debian.user sounds more like a mailinglist than a usenet group to
>>> me, but since you used made-up group names in the first article, it is
>>> hard to say.
>
>> Yes, but posting to the ML or posting to the usenet group sends the
>> message to the other, so that both are synchronized.
>
> I was about to guess that the software that does this news<->email
> gating perhaps discards crossposts, but I would have expected your
> missing article to have reached the other newsgroup at least, then.
Yes, but it was not the case, as you mentioned here, from my previous message.

> Given that you can see Gnus deliver the article to the server and the
> server doesn't give you an error back, I still think the problem isn't
> with Gnus and how you use it.
Ok. Thanks. But that remains an obscure reason for me, then.
- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

Getting something done is an accomplishment; getting something done
 right is an achievement.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvl1zMACgkQM0LLzLt8MhwvxACcCGzUxg3nFmvWeD62/9WNpoKu
yQUAn0LtYiF+RH5VqqJO8vtGJ3VTnw/q
=vB5I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[José Manuel García-Patos]

>> Not really, no. I think testing should be done in dedicated test groups
>> only, regardless of whether you test within a thread or create a new
>> one.
> I knew no other test group available on my news-gate than dk.test. :-(

What about gnu.test? It wasn't that hard to find. Just a simple
search on the *Group* buffer. Did you think that test groups only
existed in Denmark, or what?

Adam is right: Test groups (a whole lot of them, just try and search for
them like I did) exist for a reason, and that is not polluting the real
groups with test messages.

-- 
José Manuel García-Patos
Madrid

Re: Follow-Ups and multiple groups?

[Merciadri Luca]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

jgarciapa3@alumno.uned.es (José Manuel García-Patos) writes:

>>> Not really, no. I think testing should be done in dedicated test groups
>>> only, regardless of whether you test within a thread or create a new
>>> one.
>> I knew no other test group available on my news-gate than dk.test. :-(
>
> What about gnu.test? It wasn't that hard to find. Just a simple
> search on the *Group* buffer. Did you think that test groups only
> existed in Denmark, or what?
Your message looks nervous. I knew gnu.test, but my news-gate does not
know about it, sorry, I cannot modify my news-gate's feeds!

> Adam is right: Test groups (a whole lot of them, just try and search for
> them like I did) exist for a reason, and that is not polluting the real
> groups with test messages.
Sure. I did not say the opposite.

- -- 
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- -- 

So many dreams are waiting to be realized.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkvnBEAACgkQM0LLzLt8MhzERgCfQfdYNeNZG5TsstkfYwTSOn5j
hKQAniwYjQ2c/HZoDndqZeE50ZJLm51S
=FoQb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----