Re: [Pan-users] Aggregating servers (was Re: choosing news server)

[Charles Kerr]

> I'm sorry to say I found it so contrary to the way I work, that I gave up
> entirely, until the new version reaches 1.0 -- which, I hope, I hope
> (pretty please with sugar on it?) may make it an option whether to
> aggregate them. Is there hope?
>
> Both just feel so wrong, somehow, that they keep me from holding my
> attention on what I'm trying to do -- forcing me to concentrate on
> stuff I don't even want to know about.

I have to admit this thread baffles me.  For the most part,
aggregated servers will "just work" without any hoops to jump through.
David's complaint makes sense, but I have no idea why aggregation
distracts you, Beartooth.

As for David's case... when a primary server isn't available,
Pan should still download articles from the secondary without fuss.
If Pan's attempts to connect to the primary are slowing things down,
just make your fast-but-unavailable server your backup and make
the slow-but-available server your primary.

For a better fix, I like Walt's "disable server" toggle idea.
It would be in the server edit dialog.  Pan could also show a
"do you want to disable server?" dialog when it's unable to connect.
Walt, David, does this sound right?

Anyway, the idea of having an 'active' server a la 0.14
is a nonstarter IMO as it conflicts with multiserver downloads.
I'm happy to hear about specific problems and fixing them with
refinements to the current scheme, though.

cheers,
Charles