Somebody signing messages as Evan Prodromou wrote:
> if (in_reply_to is set) {
> notice.in_reply_to = in_reply_to;
> } else if ((notice not from API or Web) and (notice content starts
> with "@name ")) {
> notice.in_reply_to = last notice by initial @name in
> content;
> }
> }This seems reasonable. > We may want to fine-tune this further in the future by putting a time > limit or inbox limit on those other input channels. It's very unlikely > that someone is replying by XMPP or SMS to a notice that was posted 8 > months ago, or to a notice that they didn't receive via XMPP or SMS. Not as true, I reply to stuff that failed to come over XMPP, or really old stuff I discover, all the time. > Comments? I still feel it would be beneficial to allow XMPP (and maybe SMS, email as well) to specify what they're replying to in an easy way, since complex conversations often result in wanting to reply to the not-quite newest one. I have a patchset on gitorious that solves this for XMPP. -- Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma Please see <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted. edition right joseph
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Laconica-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
