Upgrading to 3.2.7 changed the read status of many posts

[janine]

Without realizing it I somehow got stuck on an old version of NNW; I
think it was 3b14 or maybe 3.2b4. In response to Brent's post, I
upgraded to the latest version (I had to manually tell NNW to check
for updates, and there it was).

I have some feeds with months worth of unread posts. Due to the
upgrade, those have now had most of the posts marked as read. I can't
tell exactly what criteria NNW is using; it looks like maybe anything
more than a month old is now marked read.

I checked in Preferences and have it set to keep news items for 365
days. Of course they aren't exactly gone, they just aren't unread
anymore, so it's less likely that I'll ever go read them.

I don't expect there to be any way to undo this but I am curious if
there is some setting I've overlooked to get the previous behavior
back, or if it is going to keep on automatically marking things read
as time goes by?

janine

[Tamara Crowe]

I believe this has to do with Google Reader syncing. Google Reader marks things read after 30 days, so Brent made NNW match so that unread counts wouldn't be out of sync between clients/web.

[janine]

So this is just something Google Reader does and there's no way around
it? That would be unfortunate, at least for me and my reading
habits. I guess this explains why the iPhone version has always shown
a lot more read items than the desktop.

Thanks for the info!

On Jun 15, 7:31 pm, Tamara Crowe <tam...@darkglass.org> wrote:
> I believe this has to do with Google Reader syncing. Google Reader marks things read after 30 days, so Brent made NNW match so that unread counts wouldn't be out of sync between clients/web.
>

[Tamara Crowe]

Well, Brent made NNW do it because Google Reader does it. Otherwise,
people complain about unread counts not matching. I believe he has
said it's an issue he is not completely satisfied with, but that's the
way it is for now. Pretty sure there's no way to make Google Reader
itself behave differently.

[janine]

Yea, I can see that. Personally I was happy with the way it was; I
never use Google Reader directly so I don't care about the mismatch.

I don't know if Brent reads these, but maybe he could make this
configurable? I would prefer to be able to keep my unread posts
forever and just ignore what Google Reader is doing. Seems like
something that would make a good Preferences setting, since different
people will want different behaviors.

On Jun 16, 10:10 am, Tamara Crowe <tam...@darkglass.org> wrote:
> Well, Brent made NNW do it because Google Reader does it. Otherwise,  
> people complain about unread counts not matching. I believe he has  
> said it's an issue he is not completely satisfied with, but that's the  
> way it is for now. Pretty sure there's no way to make Google Reader  
> itself behave differently.
>

[janine]

Also, it's kind of too late for this now, but I think the upgrade
should have warned me that it was going to do this. Unread counts are
user data, and it's not nice when an upgrade destroys data that can't
be retrieved or easily recreated. Probably most everyone has already
been affected so there's no point in putting this feature in now, but
it seems wrong to me that it wasn't there in the first place.

On Jun 16, 10:10 am, Tamara Crowe <tam...@darkglass.org> wrote:

> Well, Brent made NNW do it because Google Reader does it. Otherwise,  
> people complain about unread counts not matching. I believe he has  
> said it's an issue he is not completely satisfied with, but that's the  
> way it is for now. Pretty sure there's no way to make Google Reader  
> itself behave differently.
>

[Brent Simmons]

You're absolutely right it should handle this better.

-Brent

PS Yes, I read everything on this list. I don't always have time to reply -- since I have to make time to write code, too. But I read everything.

[garbanzito]

On Jun 16, 11:28 am, janine <janine.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also, it's kind of too late for this now, but I think the upgrade
> should have warned me that it was going to do this.  Unread counts are
> user data, and it's not nice when an upgrade destroys data that can't
> be retrieved or easily recreated.   Probably most everyone has already
> been affected so there's no point in putting this feature in now, but
> it seems wrong to me that it wasn't there in the first place.

while i agree in principle about changing user data, in a way Google
Reader's policy is what had changed my user data and NNW has changed
it back; or so it appears after working my way past a previous failed
update because of how NNW balked starting yesterday with v 3.2 -- it
looks like old articles that had been involuntarily "expired" by
Google Reader were revived as unread articles after the upgrade; this
was disconcerting at first, but gave me the opportunity to revisit
some things i had missed

otoh, some feeds now have old articles with today's date

so a mixed blessing