On Sunday, January 14, 2024 6:01:45 AM UTC William Herrin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 12:58?PM Bryan Fields <Bryan@bryanfields.net> wrote:
> > On 1/12/24 3:04 PM, Mu wrote:
> > > Would it be possible for you to reply in-thread, rather than creating a new thread with a new subject line every time you reply to someone?
> > >
> > > Trying to follow the conversation becomes very difficult for no reason.
> >
> > Threading has nothing to do with subject lines. RFC822 (now 5822) specifies
> > how this works based on message ID. This thread displays fine in threaded
> > mode in my MUA and in the archives.
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> Respectfully, your MUA is not the only MUA. Others work differently.
>
> GMail, for example, follows the message IDs as you say but assumes
> that if you change the subject line in your reply (more than adding
> "Re:") then you intend to start a new thread from that point in the
> discussion. It groups messages accordingly.
>
> This is not an unreasonable expectation: if you merely want to
> continue the current conversation without going off on a new tangent
> then there's no need for a different subject line.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
I have been using KMail to read this list. Just thought I'd throw my hat in the ring there, I guess!
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 12:58?PM Bryan Fields <Bryan@bryanfields.net> wrote:
> > On 1/12/24 3:04 PM, Mu wrote:
> > > Would it be possible for you to reply in-thread, rather than creating a new thread with a new subject line every time you reply to someone?
> > >
> > > Trying to follow the conversation becomes very difficult for no reason.
> >
> > Threading has nothing to do with subject lines. RFC822 (now 5822) specifies
> > how this works based on message ID. This thread displays fine in threaded
> > mode in my MUA and in the archives.
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> Respectfully, your MUA is not the only MUA. Others work differently.
>
> GMail, for example, follows the message IDs as you say but assumes
> that if you change the subject line in your reply (more than adding
> "Re:") then you intend to start a new thread from that point in the
> discussion. It groups messages accordingly.
>
> This is not an unreasonable expectation: if you merely want to
> continue the current conversation without going off on a new tangent
> then there's no need for a different subject line.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
I have been using KMail to read this list. Just thought I'd throw my hat in the ring there, I guess!