Pan beta in FC6

So, someone in their wisdom decided to include a beta version of the rewrite of Pan in Extras. Fat lot of good that is without being able to import my 3 servers and all the subscribed groups and messages in them. I refuse to set them all up again. Is there an RPM of the old stable version kicking around for FC6?

Wayne

Originally Posted by rondonjin

So, someone in their wisdom decided to include a beta version of the rewrite of Pan in Extras. Fat lot of good that is without being able to import my 3 servers and all the subscribed groups and messages in them. I refuse to set them all up again. Is there an RPM of the old stable version kicking around for FC6?

Wayne

to answer my own question I snagged the stable Pan from FC5 extras and installed it after removing the beta that was installed in FC6. If you can't migrate your existing news-servers from a stable version to a beta version then it should NOT be on the servers.

So far FC6 has been a disappointment, tomorrow I will either go back to FC5 or try Edgy.

Wayne

Originally Posted by rondonjin

So, someone in their wisdom decided to include a beta version of the rewrite of Pan in Extras. Fat lot of good that is without being able to import my 3 servers and all the subscribed groups and messages in them. I refuse to set them all up again. Is there an RPM of the old stable version kicking around for FC6?

Wayne

In the end I bit the bullet and reinstalled the Pan beta from Extras and set-up 2 of the 3 servers I use and re-subscribed to most of the groups I read. I look at it as an exercise in pruning I hardly read most of the articles on one server (eComStation) anyway and I un-subscribed from the Mandrake/Mandriva newsgroups as I no longer use that distro. I like it that all subscribed groups are on the same list and you don't have to flick through the different servers to see all your groups.

We'll see how it goes from here....

Wayne

[parish]

Wayne,

If you subscribe to the same group on different servers is the new pan able to keep track and properly index posts and crossposts across all servers? For example, let's say I subscribe to a group on server A and B. When I mark posts as read on A, they are also marked as read in the other groups on A to which they have been crossposted. Are they also marked as read in the posted/crossposted groups on B?

Apologies for the clumsy wording...

Thanks.

Daniel

Originally Posted by parish

Wayne,

If you subscribe to the same group on different servers is the new pan able to keep track and properly index posts and crossposts across all servers? For example, let's say I subscribe to a group on server A and B. When I mark posts as read on A, they are also marked as read in the other groups on A to which they have been crossposted. Are they also marked as read in the posted/crossposted groups on B?

Apologies for the clumsy wording...

Thanks.

Daniel

Hi Daniel,

Unfortunately, that's one thing I can't test as the 3 servers I use all carry unique groups. I would *assume* it handles normal crossposting on the same server in the regular way though, although again that's something I haven't tested.

Wayne

[parish]

Okay, thanks anyway Wayne. I'm actually trying to install FC6 right now on my alternate system. Once it's up I'll test this out on the new Pan and post back.

Daniel

[Snocrash]

Originally Posted by rondonjin

So, someone in their wisdom decided to include a beta version of the rewrite of Pan in Extras. Fat lot of good that is without being able to import my 3 servers and all the subscribed groups and messages in them. I refuse to set them all up again. Is there an RPM of the old stable version kicking around for FC6?

Wayne

Same here. I refuse to set them all up and download again. My current .pan folder is over 2Gig with headers, etc.

I did the same as you and grabbed an old version and isntalled it. Now my question is, how do I keep the annoying "update" message from coming up and updating Pan when I update other stuff???

-Sno

[parish]

Hi Guys,

Although it doesn't handle your accumulated headers, cache, etc., I saved myself some trouble by having the old pan write out a newsrc file for each server and then read it into the new pan; worked like a charm. I like this new version a lot, especially being able to specify primary and fallback servers. Well worth the effort to regenerate/download all my headers etc.

Snocrash (loved that book BTW): If you're referring to automatic updates via yum, just add the line exclude=pan* somewhere in your /etc/yum.conf file.

Daniel

[Snocrash]

Originally Posted by parish

Hi Guys,

Snocrash (loved that book BTW): If you're referring to automatic updates via yum, just add the line exclude=pan* somewhere in your /etc/yum.conf file.

Daniel

Kewl....thanks,

-Sno

[RahulSundaram]

Originally Posted by rondonjin

So, someone in their wisdom decided to include a beta version of the rewrite of Pan in Extras. Fat lot of good that is without being able to import my 3 servers and all the subscribed groups and messages in them. I refuse to set them all up again. Is there an RPM of the old stable version kicking around for FC6?

Wayne

The discussion on https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedo.../msg00734.html will help understand why Pan was updated.

[Snocrash]

Originally Posted by RahulSundaram

The discussion on https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedo.../msg00734.html will help understand why Pan was updated.

I understand why pan is being upgraded. I think it needs it and upgrading it is a good thing. I just agree with rondonjin that it should not have been put in the repos without some sort of migration tool to move user data from the old version to the new one. At the least, some sort of warning should have been given at the upgrade informing the user that their setup will be no good after the update. Until that is done, the old version should have been packaged and left in the repos.

I also understand that FC is a proving ground version of Linux for RedHat. But honestly, this is the type of thing that made me leave FC in the first place a few years ago. I was hoping it had stopped by now.

Just my $.02

-Sno

[RahulSundaram]

Originally Posted by Snocrash

I understand why pan is being upgraded. I think it needs it and upgrading it is a good thing. I just agree with rondonjin that it should not have been put in the repos without some sort of migration tool to move user data from the old version to the new one. At the least, some sort of warning should have been given at the upgrade informing the user that their setup will be no good after the update. Until that is done, the old version should have been packaged and left in the repos.

I also understand that FC is a proving ground version of Linux for RedHat. But honestly, this is the type of thing that made me leave FC in the first place a few years ago. I was hoping it had stopped by now.

Just my $.02

-Sno

You should use bugzilla to suggest enhancements. You might consider not associating every packaging issue with the "providing ground" meme since this package is maintained by a community volunteer.

[Snocrash]

Originally Posted by RahulSundaram

You should use bugzilla to suggest enhancements. You might consider not associating every packaging issue with the "providing ground" meme since this package is maintained by a community volunteer.

Sorry...didn't mean to come off short...must have been pissed off at something else. And thank you to the community and said volunteer for keeping this app going.

That said, I have a policy question about bugzilla. I would not consider this a bug. It is more of an oversight/planning issue. The software functions fine as far as I could tell when I upgraded it. Where do I bring such concerns?? Or is bugzilla the correct avenue to take???

-Sno

[RahulSundaram]

Originally Posted by Snocrash

Sorry...didn't mean to come off short...must have been pissed off at something else. And thank you to the community and said volunteer for keeping this app going.

That said, I have a policy question about bugzilla. I would not consider this a bug. It is more of an oversight/planning issue. The software functions fine as far as I could tell when I upgraded it. Where do I bring such concerns?? Or is bugzilla the correct avenue to take???

-Sno

Software functioning out of the box as required is just one part of a good packaging process. Upgrading properly taking into account user's data is definitely something that should be considered when pushing out new updates. While this might acceptably on occasions, for example during a completely new release of Fedora where major updates are done (with appropriate documentation in the release notes etc) or otherwise warn the users their data wouldnt be accessible without conversion, this does appear to be a bug ( I dont know. I dont use pan) in the case of this pan upgrade. Reporting this to bugzilla is fine but if you prefer discussions, you can post to fedora-extras list.

[Snocrash]

Originally Posted by RahulSundaram

Software functioning out of the box as required is just one part of a good packaging process. Upgrading properly taking into account user's data is definitely something that should be considered when pushing out new updates. While this might acceptably on occasions, for example during a completely new release of Fedora where major updates are done (with appropriate documentation in the release notes etc) or otherwise warn the users their data wouldnt be accessible without conversion, this does appear to be a bug ( I dont know. I dont use pan) in the case of this pan upgrade. Reporting this to bugzilla is fine but if you prefer discussions, you can post to fedora-extras list.

Thanks.... I will probably do both.

-Sno