[sup-talk] on sup
Magnus Therning
magnus at therning.org
Thu Sep 6 02:50:33 EDT 2007
Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Wed Sep 05 22:55:38 +0100 2007:
[..]
> What little Sup currently does in the way of pushing state information
> back into sources, it does through sup-sync-back, which is meant to
> push a batch of state changes back to one or more sources in one go.
> Right now that's restricted to deleting messages marked as deleted or
> spam from mbox sources, but it would be the natural place to push the
> new/read state back as well, at least if you were happy with batch
> operation.
I'm more than happy with batch operations. I suspect that doing this
outside of sup proper also keeps the main program itself a little
simpler.
I did look at the sup-sync-back tool and noticed that it performs some
mbox operations on its own. Operations that I feel really belong in the
mbox source class itself. I feel sup-sync-back would become simpler if
polymorphism was put to use a bit more. So, do you have any
philosophical problems with a `delete` method being added to the
sources? (It would probably be followed by a `mark_as_read` in the
future.)
--
Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)
magnus@therning.org Jabber: magnus.therning@gmail.com
http://therning.org/magnus
What if I don't want to obey the laws? Do they throw me in jail with
the other bad monads?
-- Daveman
More information about the sup-talk
mailing list