On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 06:39:55PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar via Mutt-dev wrote: > Hi John, > > > Date: 2026-08-23 11:13:29-0400 > > From: John Hawkinson <[email protected]> > > > > I am confused at the baseline request, and it seems like the thread is > > discussing *how* this should be implemented and not *whether* it should be. > > Huh? > > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 10:57 AM Alejandro Colomar via Mutt-dev < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > When I forward a message, I want to have it threaded under the original > > > mail. [...] > The proposed change was: > > What do you think of adding a 'References' header field to forwarded > mails? > > As to why do I want it threaded... I want them together, to make it > easier to find all of the related mails. I thought this would be > obvious, but just in case, I say it now. > > > Is it for your personal benefit as the sender, or is for the perceived > > benefit of the recipients of your forwarded messages? Or something else? > > I think the justification seems clear about this. It's for my personal > benefit as a sender. I don't see any particular benefit in the receiver > (unless I also bounce the original mail, but that's unusual to do if I > also send a forwarded mail).
This all sounds like a workaround for a manual link-thread.
