On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 03:05:13PM -0500, David Champion wrote:
> > Thu, May 22, 2014 at 05:19:42PM EDT To [email protected] Display of
> > threads, order in question
> > Thu, May 22, 2014 at 07:22:07PM EDT Cameron Simpson └─>
> > Thu, May 22, 2014 at 08:54:23PM EDT To [email protected] └─>
> > Thu, May 22, 2014 at 09:37:48PM EDT Cameron Simpson └─>
> > Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:19:11AM EDT To [email protected] └─>
> > Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:22:54AM EDT David Champion └─>
> >
> >
> > Sat, May 17, 2014 at 02:51:40PM EDT Kevin J. McCarthy ┬─>Re: Writing a
> > wrapper for the editor: mutt aborts in-between
> > Sun, May 18, 2014 at 04:14:23AM EDT Chris Green │ └─>
> > Sat, May 17, 2014 at 05:04:29PM EDT Mike Glover └─>Re: Writing a
> > wrapper for the editor: mutt aborts in-between
> > Sat, May 17, 2014 at 05:59:53PM EDT Karl Voit └─>
> > Sat, May 17, 2014 at 09:51:00PM EDT Cameron Simpson ├─>
> > Sun, May 18, 2014 at 02:58:31AM EDT Karl Voit │ └─>
> > Sat, May 17, 2014 at 07:02:19PM EDT Gary Johnson └─>
>
> These both look correct, to me, for
> sort_aux=reverse-last-date[-received]. Whether sort=threads or
> sort=reverse-threads is irrelevant in this case, since you're showing
> only one thread.
>
> What looks wrong to you?
David,
I understand. Thank you for clearing it up.
===CONFIDENTIAL===
--
GG
