[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject |
Date: |
Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:41:52 -0500 |
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:57:51 -0800
> From: Don Armstrong <address@hidden>
>
> So follow threads instead of subjects. I don't use Rmail, so I can't
> tell you how to get it to do that.
There is no such functionality in Rmail, so the only way is to code
it first.
> > As long as there are loads of broken MUAs, using the Subject line
> > will always be more reliable than references. Until now.
>
> No, it's always less reliable. You can use the Subject: as a fallback
> when you don't have References: or In-Reply-To:, but Subject: doesn't
> tell you which message a message is in response to, nor how to elide a
> subthread, or any of a huge number of things you can do with threads
> that aren't possible when you "group" by subject.
You are talking about treating email as news group discussions. I
don't need to go that far; if I did, I'd probably switch to Gnus.
All I want is to find the messages related to a certain subject. I
don't care much to build a tree-like structure out of them, because
the body of the messages has that information, and that is normally
enough for my needs.
> > > If you want to follow a thread, References: and In-Reply-To: are
> > > the way to do that; Subject: may approximate it, but it's never as
> > > accurate.
> >
> > What other use cases will break it? Until now, I didn't see any.
>
> Any time someone changes the subject, or uses a method of quoting that
> doesn't keep it intact.
Well, I have yet to find such cases, then.
Anyway, we are repeating ourselves. It is quite clear that you don't
see a problem in what the tracker does, while I do, because it
interferes with the way I'm used to read mail for many years. I guess
we will have to agree to disagree on that.
- Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Stefan Monnier, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/12
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/13
- Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject, Glenn Morris, 2008/12/13
- Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/13
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Glenn Morris, 2008/12/13
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/13
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Stefan Monnier, 2008/12/13
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/12/14
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Don Armstrong, 2008/12/14
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Glenn Morris, 2008/12/14
- Re: Bugs against emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Stefan Monnier, 2008/12/14