Re: special reply_regexp
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:53:49PM +0100, Josh Huber wrote: 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? But with your regexp you cannot determine the head of the thread (w/o the Re:) like the first line of your example [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method You need to add a "?" after the (re...) pattern. The regexp which finally works for me is now set reply_regexp= '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?((re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*)?+[ \t]*' Cu, Daniel.
Re: special reply_regexp
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 04:20:28PM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote: But with your regexp you cannot determine the head of the thread (w/o the Re:) like the first line of your example [ruby-talk:7097] Rubyize this method You need to add a "?" after the (re...) pattern. The regexp which finally works for me is now set reply_regexp= '^(\[[a-z0-9:-]+\][ \t]*)?((re([\\[0-9\\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*)?+[ \t]*' That's interesting, because the one I posted works fine for me, and the default mutt reply_regexp doesn't do what you suggest: Default: "^(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*" I assumed the reply regexp was applied to the subject, and the matched text is removed, then the resultant string is compared with other subjects. If this is true (is it not?), then you shouldn't have to conditionalize the re portion of the subject. -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/6B21489A 61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A PGP signature
Re: special reply_regexp
Moin, On 00-12-18, Josh Huber wrote: [-- PGP-Ausgabe folgt (aktuelle Zeit: Mon Dec 18 19:26:05 2000) --] gpg: Unterschrift vom Mon 18 Dez 2000 17:59:07 CET, DSA Schlüssel ID 6B21489A gpg: FALSCHE Unterschrift von "Josh Huber [EMAIL PROTECTED]" [-- Ende der PGP-Ausgabe --] That would be: gpg: WRONG signature from "Josh Huber [EMAIL PROTECTED]" Thorsten PGP signature
Re: special reply_regexp
Hi, thank you the regexp, but mutt still does not show threads. I'm puzzled. An example of the subjects, which should be recognized as a thread is following: Subject: [ifc-ml:2583] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut Subject: [ifc-ml:2584] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut The sorting method is "thread", and there is of course "strict_threads" unset. Somehow the regexp still does not work. Any idea? On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 09:27:40PM -0500, Laurent Pelecq wrote: Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 21:27:40 -0500 From: Laurent Pelecq [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mutt User List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: special reply_regexp Mail-Followup-To: Laurent Pelecq [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mutt User List [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 08:37:41AM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote: Hi, in one of my folder containing msgs from a mailing list I would like to sort the msgs as threads. With the default reply_regexp this does not work, because the mailing list always puts a string "[ifc-ml:] " at the beginning of the subject line of each msg. is an increasing number and is always different. If mutt would check for the text after this string and possible Re:'s, then the threading display might work. Is this possible? If so, how should the reply_regexp look like? You can try "^(\[[][]*\][ \t]+)?(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*" \[[][]*\] should match: [ anything_except_brackets ] Or more specific: "^(\[[a-z0-9:-]*\][ \t]+)?(re ... " If you are sure that you can have only a-z0-9:- between the brackets. I've just tested that to tag messages and it worked. -- Laurent Pelecq [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: special reply_regexp
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 10:20:17AM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote: Hi, thank you the regexp, but mutt still does not show threads. I'm puzzled. An example of the subjects, which should be recognized as a thread is following: Subject: [ifc-ml:2583] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut Subject: [ifc-ml:2584] Re: Illegal circuit data for smincut The sorting method is "thread", and there is of course "strict_threads" unset. Somehow the regexp still does not work. Any idea? The problem here, as I understand it, is that mutt expects reply subjects to be of the form reply expressionparent subject But certain list servers construct original subjects like this [ifc-ml:] base subject and replies like this [ifc-ml:] Re: base subject Note that part of the parent subject line has been removed from the reply subject line. Even if you construct a reply_regexp that matches "[ifc-ml:] Re: ", mutt still can't identify the parent message because the base subjects don't match: mutt is looking for a parent message whose subject is "base subject", but the subject of the parent message is actually "[ifc-ml:] base subject". Mutt's threading would only work if the replies were of the form [ifc-ml:] Re: [ifc-ml:] base subject reply ID base message ID I hope that was clear. 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. Gary -- Gary Johnson | Agilent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] | RF Communications Product Generation Unit | Spokane, Washington, USA
Re: special reply_regexp
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:12:37AM -0800, Gary Johnson wrote: [ifc-ml:] Re: [ifc-ml:] base subject reply ID base message ID I hope that was clear. 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? -- Josh Huber | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/6B21489A 61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A PGP signature
Re: special reply_regexp
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
Re: special reply_regexp
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 08:37:41AM +0100, Daniel Kollar wrote: Hi, in one of my folder containing msgs from a mailing list I would like to sort the msgs as threads. With the default reply_regexp this does not work, because the mailing list always puts a string "[ifc-ml:] " at the beginning of the subject line of each msg. is an increasing number and is always different. If mutt would check for the text after this string and possible Re:'s, then the threading display might work. Is this possible? If so, how should the reply_regexp look like? You can try "^(\[[][]*\][ \t]+)?(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*" \[[][]*\] should match: [ anything_except_brackets ] Or more specific: "^(\[[a-z0-9:-]*\][ \t]+)?(re ... " If you are sure that you can have only a-z0-9:- between the brackets. I've just tested that to tag messages and it worked. -- Laurent Pelecq [EMAIL PROTECTED]
special reply_regexp
Hi, in one of my folder containing msgs from a mailing list I would like to sort the msgs as threads. With the default reply_regexp this does not work, because the mailing list always puts a string "[ifc-ml:] " at the beginning of the subject line of each msg. is an increasing number and is always different. If mutt would check for the text after this string and possible Re:'s, then the threading display might work. Is this possible? If so, how should the reply_regexp look like? Thank you very much! Daniel.
