[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?
From: |
K. Haley |
Subject: |
Re: [Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ? |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:21:49 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 |
On 1/24/2011 8:37 PM, Duncan wrote:
> Oh, and another long-standing feature request, but DEFINITELY nothing to
> hold-up for as it has been around since before scoring (back then it was a
> trinary kill/normal/watch, not the nearly continuously variable scoring
> pan has had for years), so well previous to the 0.90+ series, would be
> making scoring possible on all headers and the whole post after download,
> not just on the overview data. Such scoring wouldn't be as efficient as
> over-view-only scoring, but it'd make possible such things as killfiling a
> user who deliberately abuses from header changes to avoid killfiling, but
> whose x-complaints-to, organization, and/or other headers or the body
> content itself, remain consistent enough to filter by. I've wanted that
> ability for a very long time and there's a bug from I'd guess at least
> five years ago posted to that effect, but Charles marked it "bluesky", as
> something that would be nice... "someday". Maybe I'll get lucky and get
> it for pan 1.5 or 2.0? <shrug>
While there's no ui, the ability to score on any header has been in for
some time now. As for scoring on the body....
> There is one very frustrating but equally long-standing bug having to do
> with pan not seeing new posts in groups just subscribed (or freshly
> visited without subscribing) if there are cross-posts between it and a
> long-term subscribed group, that I'd love to have fixed before 1.0, but
> I've not been able to sufficiently narrow it down or describe it well
> enough to really form a good bug report, and as the bug has persisted for
> years, I don't see that it's practical to hold up 1.0 for it, either.
What could be happening is that marking a cross-posted article as read
updates the read articles in all relevant groups. This could make pan
think it has already retrieved all headers up to that article. If so
then a work around would be to request the last x or x days headers
instead of new.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- [Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, (continued)
Re: [Pan-users] New version of pan ?, Valeryan_24, 2011/01/15
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Petr Kovar, 2011/01/16
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Petr Kovar, 2011/01/16
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Duncan, 2011/01/17
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Petr Kovar, 2011/01/24
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Duncan, 2011/01/24
Re: [Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?,
K. Haley <=
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Duncan, 2011/01/25
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, walt, 2011/01/25
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Duncan, 2011/01/26
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Petr Kovar, 2011/01/30
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Robert Marshall, 2011/01/17
[Pan-users] 0.134 pre-release (was: New version of pan ?), Petr Kovar, 2011/01/24
Re: [Pan-users] 0.134 pre-release, Heinrich Mueller, 2011/01/25
[Pan-users] Re: 0.134 pre-release (was: New version of pan ?), Lacrocivious Acrophosist, 2011/01/25
[Pan-users] Re: 0.134 pre-release (was: New version of pan ?), Robert Marshall, 2011/01/28
[Pan-users] Re: New version of pan ?, Maurice Batey, 2011/01/15