Kurt Schilling <dk_steinh...@mailhaven.com> posted 4962b5e9.4070...@mailhaven.com, excerpted below, on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:37:45 -0500:
> WRT to news.software.readers many of the regulars there don't care for > the 'new' pan because of the lack of good granular filtering. > Consequently, when the subject of Pan comes up it is often suggested > reverting to the old "stable" version. ... Except that the filtering/scoring isn't really any different in old- pan. Now, there /were/ useful "rules" that could be based on the scoring, that allowed auto-download, auto-mark-read, and/or auto-delete, and those are /very/ sorely missed by some of us. However, old-pan was so terribly rotten at scaling that it was useless on groups of any size (> 1M articles). New-pan easily manages an order of magnitude more articles, using less memory. Also, the seamless integration of servers is very nice, tho it'd be nice if it were a bit more flexible -- you could disable a server temporarily without deleting it or playing manual filesystem games, for instance. Overall, new-pan certainly scales better and is a better base as it's more modular and easier to add stuff too. However, there's still a few features missing that will make old-pan better for those who don't deal with particularly large binary groups and/or who don't need server integration. If only I were a coder... -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
