From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: [Accepted] org-gnus-follow-link and nnimap-request-scan Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 11:10:29 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <20110502091029.891C74377D5@u016822.science.uva.nl> References: <8762qjqqfy.fsf@member.fsf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33624) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGp9E-0006N5-OV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 05:10:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGp9C-0005Nr-7z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 05:10:31 -0400 Received: from u016822.science.uva.nl ([146.50.39.34]:50623) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGp9B-0005Ng-Se for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 05:10:30 -0400 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Patch 747 (http://patchwork.newartisans.com/patch/747/) is now "Accepted". Maintainer comment: none This relates to the following submission: http://mid.gmane.org/%3C8762qjqqfy.fsf%40member.fsf.org%3E Here is the original message containing the patch: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Subject: [O] org-gnus-follow-link and nnimap-request-scan > Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:30:17 -0000 > From: Tassilo Horn > X-Patchwork-Id: 747 > Message-Id: <8762qjqqfy.fsf@member.fsf.org> > To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > > Eden Cardim writes: > > > Tassilo> No, I just wasn't really sure what that SCAN argument > > Tassilo> means, so I tried to be as safe as possible. If it's > > Tassilo> always safe to provide nil, let's change that. > > > > Well, right now all it does is to check split rules against incoming > > mail. But, if we have a link to a message in org, then that message > > already went through the split process, so re-splitting is > > unnecessary. > > Ok, so here we go: > Bye, > Tassilo > > > >From 89fecc7b938385647618dc28c4df304df872e6eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Tassilo Horn > Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 20:27:54 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] Call gnus-activate-group without SCAN arg. > > * org-gnus.el (org-gnus-follow-link): Don't request scan of > group when following link. > --- > lisp/org-gnus.el | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lisp/org-gnus.el b/lisp/org-gnus.el > index eba4cb4..a5ece8b 100644 > --- a/lisp/org-gnus.el > +++ b/lisp/org-gnus.el > @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ If `org-store-link' was called with a prefix arg the meaning of > (when article > (setq article (org-substring-no-properties article))) > (cond ((and group article) > - (gnus-activate-group group t) > + (gnus-activate-group group) > (condition-case nil > (let* ((method (gnus-find-method-for-group group)) > (backend (car method)) > -- > 1.7.5.rc1 > >