Emacs CVS, question regarding ticked, dormant, \Flagged with nnimap.

Emacs CVS, question regarding ticked, dormant, \Flagged with nnimap.

[Bruno Hertz]

Hi folks

does anyone know why, when applying flags to an imap backend,
flag addition and removal are applied in that order?

Example: with nnimap-importantize-dormant enabled, if I enter
a buffer that has ticked articles and change those ticks into
dormant, on the imap side first (gnus-dormant \Flagged) is
stored on those articles, but then (\Flagged) is removed due
to removal of the tick, making importantize basically effectiveless.

You probably guess the reason I ask, i.e. I want to maintain
\Flagged cross-client, while hiding those articles upon entering
a summary buffer at the same time.

Sidenote: if you're about to recommend using (display . [unread])
to hide ticked articles per default, let me just note that this
doesn't work either.

Hints mucho appreciated.

Regards, Bruno.

Re: Emacs CVS, question regarding ticked, dormant, \Flagged with nnimap.

[Bruno Hertz]

"Bruno Hertz" <spammer.go.home@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi folks
>
> does anyone know why, when applying flags to an imap backend,
> flag addition and removal are applied in that order?
>
> Example: with nnimap-importantize-dormant enabled, if I enter
> a buffer that has ticked articles and change those ticks into
> dormant, on the imap side first (gnus-dormant \Flagged) is
> stored on those articles, but then (\Flagged) is removed due
> to removal of the tick, making importantize basically effectiveless.
>
> You probably guess the reason I ask, i.e. I want to maintain
> \Flagged cross-client, while hiding those articles upon entering
> a summary buffer at the same time.
>
> Sidenote: if you're about to recommend using (display . [unread])
> to hide ticked articles per default, let me just note that this
> doesn't work either.
>
> Hints mucho appreciated.
>
> Regards, Bruno.

Addition: the function in question seems to be gnus-update-marks,
portion

	(when (and (gnus-check-backend-function
		    'request-set-mark gnus-newsgroup-name)
		   (not (gnus-article-unpropagatable-p (cdr type))))
	  (let* ((old (cdr (assq (cdr type) (gnus-info-marks info))))
		 (del (gnus-remove-from-range (gnus-copy-sequence old) list))
		 (add (gnus-remove-from-range
		       (gnus-copy-sequence list) old)))
	    (when add
	      (push (list add 'add (list (cdr type))) delta-marks))
	    (when del
	      (push (list del 'del (list (cdr type))) delta-marks))))

which apparently is meant to work with any backend.

Still, anybody having an idea about whether exchanging add and del
might break anything?

Regards, Bruno.

Re: Emacs CVS, question regarding ticked, dormant, \Flagged with nnimap.

[Bruno Hertz]

"Bruno Hertz" <spammer.go.home@gmail.com> writes:

> Addition: the function in question seems to be gnus-update-marks,
> portion
>
> 	(when (and (gnus-check-backend-function
> 		    'request-set-mark gnus-newsgroup-name)
> 		   (not (gnus-article-unpropagatable-p (cdr type))))
> 	  (let* ((old (cdr (assq (cdr type) (gnus-info-marks info))))
> 		 (del (gnus-remove-from-range (gnus-copy-sequence old) list))
> 		 (add (gnus-remove-from-range
> 		       (gnus-copy-sequence list) old)))
> 	    (when add
> 	      (push (list add 'add (list (cdr type))) delta-marks))
> 	    (when del
> 	      (push (list del 'del (list (cdr type))) delta-marks))))
>
> which apparently is meant to work with any backend.
>
> Still, anybody having an idea about whether exchanging add and del
> might break anything?

OK, tracked this further down, the above remarks are apparently wrong.
The action list order applied to marks follows the order defined in
gnus-article-mark-lists, where 'ticked' comes before 'dormant'. So
ticked will be pushed first anyway onto the actions, regardless of
'add' or 'delete'. Which means it will be popped (and applied) last,
hence remove a \Flagged previously set by dormant.

Two solutions come to mind: redefine gnus-article-mark-lists, which
would be somewhat arbitrary and maybe invite for future mistakes, or
sort the actions in nnimap-request-set-mark to do deletes first.

I'm no elisp geek, so some advice on what best to do would be great.

Regards, Bruno.

Re: Emacs CVS, question regarding ticked, dormant, \Flagged with nnimap.

[Bruno Hertz]

"Bruno Hertz" <spammer.go.home@gmail.com> writes:

> Two solutions come to mind: redefine gnus-article-mark-lists, which
> would be somewhat arbitrary and maybe invite for future mistakes, or
> sort the actions in nnimap-request-set-mark to do deletes first.

OK, for the records, as a quick fix I put the following into my .gnus:

 (defun nnimap-mark-action-is-less-p (a b)
   (if (and (eq (nth 1 a) 'del) (eq (nth 1 b) 'add)) t nil))
 (defadvice nnimap-request-set-mark
   (before nnimap-request-set-mark-sort-actions
           (group actions &optional server) activate compile)
   (setq actions (sort actions 'nnimap-mark-action-is-less-p)))

Regards, Bruno.