[Pan-users] Re: Temporarily dead server

[Bruce Bowler]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:34:19 -0800, Travis wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Duncan" <address@hidden> To:
> <address@hidden> Sent: Tuesday,
> January 13, 2009 06:45 AM Subject: [Pan-users] Re: Temporarily dead
> server
> 
> 
>> Phil Grundig <address@hidden> posted
>> 513125.82668.qm-CvTjiXinU0fGRxTy+Q50vsz6deESKz/
address@hidden,
>> excerpted below, on  Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:56:06 +0000:
>> 
>>> Checkboxes/ticks to disable/enable a server would be an entirely
>>> sensible (and obvious) usability feature to add.
>>> 
>>> I certainly never would have guessed the '0' connection limit thing,
>>> if it works that is.
>> 
>> It doesn't... unless the feature was added for 0.133 and not put in the
>> changelog or something.  Unfortunately... as it'd be nice...
>> 
>>> Deleting a server also means the entire newsgroup list has to be
>>> downloaded again when the server is re-added, since Pan must simply
>>> delete the list!
>> 
>> What I'd do would be create a couple script thats switched out the
>> server.xml file, between one with all servers active, and one with
>> whichever server disabled, then (optionally) start pan.  Then with pan
>> shutdown, simply run one or the other script to switch-in whichever
>> server list.  If the option to start pan is included, one can then
>> replace whatever current pan menu entries or whatever with entries for
>> the scripts, after which you can invoke whichever one you like. 
>> (Without the option, one would just run the switcher script when
>> necessary, and start pan normally.)
>> 
>> Actually, the question has come up before, and after I suggested the
>> zero connection thing and it didn't work, that's what I suggested next.
>>  Note that it's possible a few other files may have to be switched out
>> at the same time to keep pan in sync.  I don't think it should need any
>> but the one, but I've not actually tried it, so I can't say for sure.
>> 
>>> And syscntl tweaking could have undesired effects on other connections
>>> for other apps and seems a bit crude.
>>> 
>>> So: two feature requests (could these be passed on?):
>>> 
>>> 1. Checkboxes/ticks to disable/enable a server.
>> 
>> As I said, this has come up before.  I believe Charles is aware of the
>> request.  However, it would be a good idea to check the pan bugzilla
>> for a feature request bug on it and file one if there's not one yet
>> filed. As with many devs, Charles doesn't keep very close tabs on the
>> lists, and prefers such feature requests be filed in the bug tracking
>> system so they don't get lost.
>> 
>> If you file a bug, you can note this thread as archived on gmane. 
>> Here's the thread origin post:
>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.apps.pan.user/10685
>> 
>> Similarly, you can then post the bug URL here so there's links both
>> ways.
>> 
>> 
> If the issue is "Temporarily dead server" why not just wait for the
> temporary situation to resolve?

Largely because I'm "impatient" :-)  

- I'm in pan several times a day.
- There are 25+ groups in the server in question
- the server has been "dead" for 2+ weeks now (but I've been assured
  "repairs are underway, don't despair")
- each time I exit pan, I get the message that "pan has stopped
  responding, kill now or wait", which bugs me. 

It seems to me that it's a reasonable function to have an "ignore this 
server for now" option that doesn't involve deleting the server, which 
deletes all the groups, which means re-subscribing to those groups when 
you want to "pay attention" to that server again in the future.

-- 
+-------------------+---------------------------------------------------+
Bruce Bowler        | True friendship comes when silence between two
1.207.633.9600      | people is comfortable.  - Dave Tyson Gentry   
address@hidden | 
+-------------------+---------------------------------------------------+