On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 02:53:49PM -0500, Josh Huber wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:12:37AM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote:
> > I think the only solution available to us is to change the internals of
> > mutt to recognize this sort of mangled subject. Perhaps "we" could add
> > a subject_ignore_regexp to tell mutt what part of a subject line to
> > ignore when threading messages.
>
> Is this necessary? I'm using:
>
> set reply_regexp=
> '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[\t]*'
>
> and it's threading mailing lists of this type for me...
>
> for example:
> [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method
> [ruby-talk:7099] Re: Rubyize this method
> [ruby-talk:7104] Re: Rubyize this method
>
> are all threaded properly. (well, not as good as messages with
> In-Reply-To: but better than having threads scattered all over the
> folder)
>
> perhaps the regex wasn't quite right?
That's strange. I tried your regex (with the addition of a space in the
first range) in the w3m-dev-en list where I've been trying on and off
for a long time to get one to work, and it didn't work, so I visited
some other mailboxes, then went back to w3m-dev-en to get an example of
it not working to use in this reply and voila, it works now! So that
partially explains why I could never get a reply_regex to work for that
list: mutt must apply reply_regex only upon certain events and I wasn't
triggering one of those events after each modification of reply_regex.
So thanks very much for setting me straight! It's nice to have that
threading working now.
Gary
--
Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | RF Communications Product Generation Unit
| Spokane, Washington, USA
