On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 07:01:31 -0500 (EST), Dave Cross wrote:
> At Fri, 23 Feb 11:50:37 2001 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:54:50 -0500 (EST), Dave Cross wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, as it's a very primitive webmail (written by me) it
> > > doesn't store the outgoing mails, so I can't see what I'm doing
> > > wrong.
> >
> > Why call it "ms-webmail"? Makes it sound like MicroSoft wrote it.
>
> That's semi-intentional. My company is called Magnum Solutions so we
> have as much right to use the initials as Microsoft. It amuses me that
> my Perl doodlings might be mistaken for Microsoft software.
I'd forgotten the name of your company. Makes sense now, and I appreciate the joke.
> > If you're not going to do that, then at least stick an In-reply-to:
> > header in, so threading algorithms work properly. (Well, threading
> > algorithms which aren't broken, like mine, which manages to put the
> > same message in the thread tree multiple times under conditions known
> > only to itself)
>
> Or, I suppose, I could do both. OR would that break stuff?
Of course not, that's what you're supposed to do. I just stick In-reply-to: on the end
of References: unless it was already there.
All I need is some decent (ie. existent) documentation, and I might be ready to
release this thing.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I did Modula-2 at university but I didn't inhale
