From unknown Wed Jun 18 23:03:59 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#9410 <9410@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#9410 <9410@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: Manual should clearly define "group name" Reply-To: bug#9410 <9410@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 06:03:59 +0000 retitle 9410 Manual should clearly define "group name" reassign 9410 gnus submitter 9410 Dave Abrahams severity 9410 normal tag 9410 notabug thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Aug 30 15:41:41 2011 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Aug 2011 19:41:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QyUBn-0006cs-Px for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:41:41 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com ([209.85.210.47]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QyUBk-0006cj-1v for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:41:37 -0400 Received: by pzk2 with SMTP id 2so10480827pzk.20 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.99.21 with SMTP id b21mr936096wfm.431.1314733105653; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:38:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto.local (92-52-237-24.gci.net. [24.237.52.92]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z1sm25409708pbz.6.2011.08.30.12.38.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pluto.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id AD9A9DB8107; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:38:21 -0800 (AKDT) From: Dave Abrahams To: submit@debbugs.gnu.org (The Gnus Bugfixing Girls + Boys) Subject: Manual should clearly define "group name" X-Debbugs-Version: 5.110018 X-Debbugs-Package: gnus Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:38:21 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) Many times when customizing things for Gnus I have a pattern to match groups, but it's never entirely clear to me against what the pattern will be matched. Will it be +:, or simply ? Is the answer different depending on whether is a primary or secondary select method? A general policy should be spelled out in the manual, and IMO you should consider adding cross-references each time group names or group name regexps come up. Thanks No Gnus v0.18 GNU Emacs 23.3.1 (x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0, Carbon Version 1.6.0 AppKit 1038.36) of 2011-07-31 on vulcan 200 Leafnode NNTP Daemon, version 1.11.8 running at localhost (my fqdn: pluto.boostpro.com) 500 Unknown command -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Aug 30 15:54:04 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Aug 2011 19:54:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QyUNo-0007bO-OE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:54:04 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com ([209.85.210.47]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QyUNn-0007bF-Ci for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:54:04 -0400 Received: by pzk2 with SMTP id 2so10496491pzk.20 for <9410@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:50:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.229.12 with SMTP id b12mr3308656wfh.413.1314733853314; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:50:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto.local (92-52-237-24.gci.net. [24.237.52.92]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f6sm6650103pbp.2.2011.08.30.12.50.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:50:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pluto.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id EFB52DB83D4; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:50:49 -0800 (AKDT) From: Dave Abrahams To: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Example References: Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:50:49 -0800 In-Reply-To: (GNU bug Tracking System's message of "Tue, 30 Aug 2011 19:42:02 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) One example of the kind of thing that results: I write regexps like this to match any group on my LocalIMAP server, which is the primary select method. ^\(\(nnimap\+\)?LocalIMAP:\)?[^+]*$ Though it's painful, I *can* program defensively like this when a regexp is involved. Where it becomes an insurmountable issue is where the actual group name is needed rather than a regexp. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 04 10:31:27 2011 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Sep 2011 14:31:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R0DjK-0000Fk-Pl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:31:27 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R0DjJ-0000Fc-1L for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:31:26 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R0Dfh-0007Ex-51 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:27:41 +0200 Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:25:08 +0200 Message-Id: To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #9410 X-MailScanner-ID: 1R0Dfh-0007Ex-51 X-Netfonds-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Netfonds-MailScanner-From: larsi@gnus.org MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1315751262.31967@6PyB0UV5YX2Nv9usLh/yQw X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) tags 9410 notabug close 9410 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 04 10:35:09 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Sep 2011 14:35:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R0Dmv-0000Li-7s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:35:09 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R0Dms-0000LR-Ta for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:35:07 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R0DjI-0007JA-2u; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:31:24 +0200 From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen To: Dave Abrahams Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" In-Reply-To: (Dave Abrahams's message of "Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:38:21 -0800") Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:24:43 +0200 Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Now-Playing: Genesis's _The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway (1)_: "Carpet Crawlers" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MailScanner-ID: 1R0DjI-0007JA-2u X-Netfonds-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Netfonds-MailScanner-From: larsi@gnus.org MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1315751484.59895@yiFwkItt+4Yws9y/tOupMw X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) Dave Abrahams writes: > Many times when customizing things for Gnus I have a pattern to match > groups, but it's never entirely clear to me against what the pattern > will be matched. Will it be +:, or simply > ? Is the answer different depending on whether is a > primary or secondary select method? The latter, mainly, which is spelled out in the section that talks about ... that stuff. I say "mainly" because if you're doing something in the backends, they don't deal with Gnus group names, but with their own group names, which are un-prefixed. > A general policy should be spelled out in the manual, and IMO you > should consider adding cross-references each time group names or group > name regexps come up. In Gnus, a group name is always what it is, so I don't think that's necessary. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/ From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 04 11:19:38 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Sep 2011 15:19:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R0ETy-0003O8-8X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:19:38 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com ([209.85.210.47]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R0ETw-0003Ny-44 for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:19:37 -0400 Received: by pzk2 with SMTP id 2so6362105pzk.20 for <9410@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 08:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.60.132 with SMTP id h4mr6287561pbr.410.1315149358863; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 08:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto.local (92-52-237-24.gci.net. [24.237.52.92]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i1sm15018884pbe.1.2011.09.04.08.15.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 04 Sep 2011 08:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pluto.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id B4EA7E1110D; Sun, 4 Sep 2011 07:15:55 -0800 (AKDT) From: Dave Abrahams To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" References: Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:15:55 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:24:43 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -3.8 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.8 (---) on Sun Sep 04 2011, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Dave Abrahams writes: > >> Many times when customizing things for Gnus I have a pattern to match >> groups, but it's never entirely clear to me against what the pattern >> will be matched. Will it be +:, or simply >> ? Is the answer different depending on whether is a >> primary or secondary select method? > > The latter, mainly, the latter, meaning "secondary select method," or meaning "simply ?" > which is spelled out in the section that talks about ... that stuff. And which one would that be? > I say "mainly" because if you're doing something in the backends, they > don't deal with Gnus group names, but with their own group names, which > are un-prefixed. Umm... so that sounds like you meant "the former" above, and not "the latter?" >> A general policy should be spelled out in the manual, and IMO you >> should consider adding cross-references each time group names or group >> name regexps come up. > > In Gnus, a group name is always what it is I'd like to join your tautology-of-the-month club, Lars! ;-) > , so I don't think that's necessary. This is clear as mud, I'm afraid. Here's an example from my gnus customizations: '(gnus-spam-process-destinations (quote (("^\\(\\(nnimap\\+\\)?LocalIMAP:\\)?[^+]*$" "[Gmail].Spam")))) '(gnus-spam-process-newsgroups (quote (("^\\(\\(nntp\\+\\)?LocalNNTP:\\)?gmane\\." ((spam spam-use-gmane)))))) I have a strong suspicion that those regexps are at least 400% more complicated than they actually need to be, but I couldn't tell what Gnus was going to be matching. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Sep 10 14:46:25 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Sep 2011 18:46:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2SZM-0000NR-KJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:46:24 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2SZC-0000LC-UL for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:46:16 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R2SV2-0003H8-D5; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 20:41:56 +0200 From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen To: Dave Abrahams Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" In-Reply-To: (Dave Abrahams's message of "Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:15:55 -0800") Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 20:37:16 +0200 Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEWYtKYNDhc+XH8UGy4l Nk8KBwsHAgS2QD4iAAACUElEQVQ4jVWTQZrbIAyF+egcoBSTtUs4QBnsWWdA7Z5x5H0W5v5H6BPB 7QyLOOhH0pMEKi3kZ62VUnpWn1cHXn+x+RN47XH6HyxmOj2UkBNcHW80A+QBxtKReVq3Drzy3p/g xXC96TeVaIBBdDHVzuqlg1l50B5Mh2JMFiUpd6CfQPugY5pF8TLOhixb77OKi+/AfwFhVsGL538g P7OnIaGDs4SbDoGeO2hcnubZ98qvlEnKhecScu8FpM9afUskmT2RmuYRifxtBsg9A4B9du/Xrdzw +Rl914RQ9jZc6BVKYyzGSn9IGTmoKZrXmNU1uii960BKD8wuu+oBJsqI5IsyFhP0jn+8OJ4o2SV1 uQLEBYP5yXwv7zn0OkJUJiUBk16Zt4gGSh0hGZWeAPNkrrHWCYFlJgCEJKsTwKbiHhClOADR2u0s H4SA3cj1IcrRJMs1Rd4PY8TuMHNaqKS3Y2/N4FAheFgTAXDaRLtu7g87txnHj2ojPHzI9I5oH/k3 7sqd296OilCIZyB0MV0wP9o+QBeFPGkpJdlYWQALwFoKMrt2h8KUylJikkEJKa0h9Ob6edRazYIm SkVNyAZNxslfFIPkAKvsmnXYLBRWSQIAl7cODLtq5Tb49QSXDiLXymxBrh3Af+8gwZrcUZf5ytyB aSNU3XxET2r8CpwASk78WVUzJLYDr3WS6bFo72AfYL9jsCUKaJ9Ac3vFXQjx6SHNPQFv8ozCKm1U aCS3E3zI5fN6vfCuZAgDXB7f+0vV63F0MOxtf9wzXpYKl+NwfwEfVM0+w/+lhAAAAABJRU5ErkJg gg== X-Now-Playing: Various's _Bustin' Out 1983: New Wave To New Beat Volume 3_: "New Order - Your Silent Face" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MailScanner-ID: 1R2SV2-0003H8-D5 X-Netfonds-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Netfonds-MailScanner-From: larsi@gnus.org MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1316284917.38891@4zD+2dbn3n288okjJEl4ZA X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) Dave Abrahams writes: >>> Many times when customizing things for Gnus I have a pattern to match >>> groups, but it's never entirely clear to me against what the pattern >>> will be matched. Will it be +:, or simply >>> ? Is the answer different depending on whether is a >>> primary or secondary select method? >> >> The latter, mainly, > > the latter, meaning "secondary select method," or meaning "simply > ?" The latter, as in "depending on whether method is...". >> I say "mainly" because if you're doing something in the backends, they >> don't deal with Gnus group names, but with their own group names, which >> are un-prefixed. > > Umm... so that sounds like you meant "the former" above, and not "the > latter?" Nope. > This is clear as mud, I'm afraid. Here's an example from my gnus > customizations: > > '(gnus-spam-process-destinations > (quote > (("^\\(\\(nnimap\\+\\)?LocalIMAP:\\)?[^+]*$" "[Gmail].Spam")))) > '(gnus-spam-process-newsgroups > (quote > (("^\\(\\(nntp\\+\\)?LocalNNTP:\\)?gmane\\." > ((spam spam-use-gmane)))))) > > I have a strong suspicion that those regexps are at least 400% more > complicated than they actually need to be, but I couldn't tell what Gnus > was going to be matching. The regexps look fine to me. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/ From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 11 07:00:25 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2011 11:00:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2hlw-0000e1-S0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 07:00:25 -0400 Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.212.45]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2hlr-0000Z0-Vs for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 07:00:22 -0400 Received: by vws17 with SMTP id 17so3465164vws.18 for <9410@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 03:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.117.6 with SMTP id o6mr141497vcq.31.1315738564509; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 03:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto.local (207-172-223-249.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.static.cable.rcn.com [207.172.223.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ig8sm8298958vdb.3.2011.09.11.03.56.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 11 Sep 2011 03:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pluto.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 923D4E7B281; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 06:56:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Abrahams To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" References: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 06:56:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "Sat, 10 Sep 2011 20:37:16 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -3.9 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.9 (---) on Sat Sep 10 2011, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Dave Abrahams writes: > >>>> Many times when customizing things for Gnus I have a pattern to match >>>> groups, but it's never entirely clear to me against what the pattern >>>> will be matched. Will it be +:, or simply >>>> ? Is the answer different depending on whether is a >>>> primary or secondary select method? >>> >>> The latter, mainly, >> >> the latter, meaning "secondary select method," or meaning "simply >> ?" > > The latter, as in "depending on whether method is...". Okay, that's useful information that could be in the doc. I'm guessing that if it's a primary select method, it'll be and if a secondary select method it'll be +:. Is that correct? >>> I say "mainly" because if you're doing something in the backends, they >>> don't deal with Gnus group names, but with their own group names, which >>> are un-prefixed. >> >> Umm... so that sounds like you meant "the former" above, and not "the >> latter?" > > Nope. With my idea of "latter" being so off-the-mark, it's no wonder I was confused. Thanks for your patience. >> This is clear as mud, I'm afraid. Here's an example from my gnus >> customizations: >> >> '(gnus-spam-process-destinations >> (quote >> (("^\\(\\(nnimap\\+\\)?LocalIMAP:\\)?[^+]*$" "[Gmail].Spam")))) >> '(gnus-spam-process-newsgroups >> (quote >> (("^\\(\\(nntp\\+\\)?LocalNNTP:\\)?gmane\\." >> ((spam spam-use-gmane)))))) >> >> I have a strong suspicion that those regexps are at least 400% more >> complicated than they actually need to be, but I couldn't tell what Gnus >> was going to be matching. > > The regexps look fine to me. Well, but they're more defensive than they need to be, aren't they? They both will match any of the following three patterns. +: : >From what you've said so far I'm guessing that even if I want to be resilient against servers switching from primary to secondary select methods, the middle pattern is unnecessary. Is that right? -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 11 11:28:44 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2011 15:28:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2lxa-0002S5-CT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:28:43 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2lxT-0002Ra-AA for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:28:39 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R2ltF-0000N1-0G; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:24:13 +0200 From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen To: Dave Abrahams Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" In-Reply-To: (Dave Abrahams's message of "Sun, 11 Sep 2011 06:56:01 -0400") Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:13:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAJFBMVEVFAQVKQ0q1rbPr5+og Gh9mX2c4LzYeCg8cFRoZExdEPkQYEBVObJmEAAACZUlEQVQ4jW3Uv2vbQBQH8BuC2zEHiTG35YyW bpHoHsPVVZulNtwegiuDunSKBy8tHERq10J00RKRYBJlK0kc9f1zfe9OEvTH2/w+9+4r+85iRmVY cfZ3sX86PdR9bWa8K/EH3B30sIfAe1i+7uEeoaqF8HAR9XBMIDivKopYRV2IAINAfZIRRIddBCgP SLxaQtSF3LfAheCCf4eoCzkmSLEnsIbbddSGCChboJkR4IQP2WtyhKTyq5YrBB9yV2QI05raXJwT +JB3WUyQug9D2BJQiCiMQlAJjfDRak1w6H4oRWAc1J/WFO5Cbo2HaVrjFz8GByFCrBzQXhXfgAcM ETiwQHhWSVqLG+yXBAd8T6nEgZkmKb8tG1uOIykDfqOmSYLQmCM2qF+usBhj8lW1VImHAuHkBWMO 9FV6dNbBFzZgVIjsA0vYwAPYi887PewyxRgCniDAdrWz62cY27BzB8rDmd6/GpwQLN5i0sBDCfBV z7UWC62HSmXv66SHj1oHerbRs0Uc4znUbQaA1lri8v0h3XDFxcZnwANBoEV6E1uUStQtPCLMpZ5N F/kzwoTXGw9vHAQzFZcE33AvD9qDNjnQX8Nw7uGJQEupbekA76CHRx0Ecz2WQQNNVtgcQ4SD07mk CgMAjLC2uGzB92UkAQoqa/B4WbZ9ki2ECJklqThNPLYwDqHJrasJwfa0gwga187tJY9ZtpZdOQB8 KvuD4Ckc03IHuBytsGWF8DOMxlh0p8CWZdMg5BPMuA6jyPcRGsD7VeT5L5wYy1C2m0Fb1j7E/iWD l9gY1b+CjDLxf94+MUIc/wYlC6YCrvIGEQAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Now-Playing: Ikonika's _Contact, Love, Want, Have_: "Fish" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MailScanner-ID: 1R2ltF-0000N1-0G X-Netfonds-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Netfonds-MailScanner-From: larsi@gnus.org MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1316359453.15011@A6x46c5Y+k+YOdxXgntcGA X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) Dave Abrahams writes: > Okay, that's useful information that could be in the doc. Do you have a suggestion where? > I'm guessing that if it's a primary select method, it'll be and > if a secondary select method it'll be +:. Is > that correct? Almost. If it's a non-native group, it'll be the latter. > With my idea of "latter" being so off-the-mark, it's no wonder I was > confused. Thanks for your patience. :-) > Well, but they're more defensive than they need to be, aren't they? > They both will match any of the following three patterns. > > +: > : > > >>>From what you've said so far I'm guessing that even if I want to be > resilient against servers switching from primary to secondary select > methods, the middle pattern is unnecessary. Is that right? Yup. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/ From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 11 13:09:44 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2011 17:09:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2nXM-0001RH-Bl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:09:44 -0400 Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com ([209.85.220.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2nXI-0001R6-8k for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:09:42 -0400 Received: by vxj14 with SMTP id 14so1201633vxj.3 for <9410@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.22.84 with SMTP id b20mr1565202vdf.413.1315760723002; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto.luannocracy.com (207-172-223-249.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.static.cable.rcn.com [207.172.223.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id be17sm8717913vdc.15.2011.09.11.10.05.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pluto.luannocracy.com (Postfix, from userid 501) id F010BE7D29C; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:05:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Abrahams To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" References: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:05:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:13:49 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -3.9 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.9 (---) on Sun Sep 11 2011, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Dave Abrahams writes: > >> Okay, that's useful information that could be in the doc. > > Do you have a suggestion where? In a section on general conventions (you'd say, e.g. "when the doc says `group name' it means a pattern like this. The method+server part is present under these conditions"). If there's no section on general conventions, you should add one near the beginning of the manual. I can think of plenty of general information that could/should go there and would improve the doc. >> I'm guessing that if it's a primary select method, it'll be and >> if a secondary select method it'll be +:. Is >> that correct? > > Almost. If it's a non-native group, it'll be the latter. *...looks up \ in the manual...* so, if I've got that wrong, there's something I still don't get: how is "non-native" different from "secondary select method?" Am I just using the wrong terminology? (here's something else for the general conventions). >> Well, but they're more defensive than they need to be, aren't they? >> They both will match any of the following three patterns. >> >> +: >> : >> >> >>>>From what you've said so far I'm guessing that even if I want to be >> resilient against servers switching from primary to secondary select >> methods, the middle pattern is unnecessary. Is that right? > > Yup. Thanks. So in general, I'm asking for this kind of information to be gleanable from the doc, without agumentation by a discussion thread with Lars :-) -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 11 17:03:59 2011 Received: (at 9410) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2011 21:03:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2rC2-0002Og-AZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:03:58 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R2rBy-0002OP-ER for 9410@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:03:55 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58] helo=stories.gnus.org) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R2r7i-0000U5-Qj; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 22:59:30 +0200 From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen To: Dave Abrahams Subject: Re: Manual should clearly define "group name" In-Reply-To: (Dave Abrahams's message of "Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:05:21 -0400") Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 22:56:27 +0200 Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAD1BMVEURCAYtFhENBAOIYEkZ DAq/LWcbAAACU0lEQVQ4jU1UgZEjIQzz8hSwPlwA8VNAOK4AzLv/ml6G7M/vTDYZBJYsi9DA03kM cfYyEjMnK1ihcZ6fu7tbTxcQLLs9ALNlr0spdotnf4DRRWuaFw8hE/MHwD4nrVz4s/4BQM7kxux5 f7ELHYL4MM88KccPsDwAO0tSSgeQU6r3Mt4vwaoTEerg2XL76KX/fNWcbw8A++30UTrzO9XLfJJ7 QavOaChI5GKql0QRRt9xgndz6/f4brEsHKLDEgPzkPRrfF+yeXcXxuC6Rp/pz/jJBo8o7xMA8v1C EwB6C+4AcAocDajYglkNPgFw2abQuiFcJiQ0kUQ0Hdq5d5BjFLIKfvoEQLEdDYP8i20mlAJBlGIJ twZlaagFYMxF5Pm4C46KFLAogBvrx/buhamZfE68c96lNgWTviomFCfeMWm4i+0FpRJkyKpFooUj apTgIBzgr5bqqgAyWSmH/A7TVtN8UzsM3DegeNlCct6qpM3CodhLIHZX1fKuWhW2mPkBFqIEgL/x 0sjm6ZFUa0sP8DrKojrkoQUkqgCohjBkx0gQOCh0RC2PnyhVA/CdxNQy3mpDcmqOe+AxJywZRiQz YXy8HQFLTP1ElG9VhD9avikmHsAVwFIMZVINryJBEep9BRY6lj3YKLUfGrirPWlEJADMF3EM4DiG MWKACu3knxOKspZjjHChRnweAF0tmBGCHoYtF15fMhXGTezPMMTNt6qZIDsmunPl/0q5vgrv1Pyn FcLoT8iSXQrMB8B9iHve8c9j+9bPDzVuzvPPsAPw2b33+F/1LZm4i8hwSgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Now-Playing: Scout Niblett's _This Fool Can Die Now_: "Black Hearted Queen" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MailScanner-ID: 1R2r7i-0000U5-Qj X-Netfonds-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Netfonds-MailScanner-From: larsi@gnus.org MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1316379570.97019@cWDDtjUQoFeB1i3F4rUfnQ X-Spam-Status: No X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 9410 Cc: 9410@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) Dave Abrahams writes: > In a section on general conventions (you'd say, e.g. "when the doc says > `group name' it means a pattern like this. The method+server part is > present under these conditions"). If there's no section on general > conventions, you should add one near the beginning of the manual. I > can think of plenty of general information that could/should go there > and would improve the doc. I've now added a couple of sentence to the Terminology section. > *...looks up \ in the manual...* so, if I've got that wrong, > there's something I still don't get: how is "non-native" different from > "secondary select method?" Am I just using the wrong terminology? > (here's something else for the general conventions). There are three types of methods. See the Terminology section. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/ From unknown Wed Jun 18 23:03:59 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:24:03 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator