Re: Problem with strict_threads
On Thursday 5 July 2018 23:17, Erik Christiansen put forth the proposition: > On 05.07.18 13:39, David Woodfall wrote: > > I've noticed now that my replies in that thread don't have a > > In-Reply-To for some reason. When I tag one and attach it with & as > > you said it joins fine and adds that. > > > > Why wouldn't mutt add that? It works fine eg in lists. > > It's ticked over 23:00 here, and I'm not recalling anything on the > missing In-Reply-To headers, but if there's still poor threading after > that's fixed, then here's what my notes say I did, back when: > > Debug: Maillist posts, lacking In-Reply-To or References headers, and with >"Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re:" pollution in the Subject, started multiple >threads, and mutt didn't cope: > Diagn: :set ? strict_threads >strict_threads is unset >:set ? sort_re >sort_re is set ># Default reply_regexp is simplistic, though. > Fix: Added in .muttrc: ># Note: Keep reply_regexp lower-case, to keep it case-insensitive. ># >set reply_regexp="^(((re(\\[[0-9]\\])?|aw|fw|fwd|\\?\\?|):)[ \t]*)+" > > There are even fancier regexes in the list archive, back in 2009/2010, > but they have more ambitious agendas. > > Erik I found the problem: PEBKAC My vim mailer function that deletes Cc and Bcc lines was leaving spaces and the In-Reply-To header line was under those so it wasn't seen as being a header and not added... -D -- Linux is obsolete -- Andrew Tanenbaum .--. oo ()// ~'
Re: Problem with strict_threads
On 05.07.18 13:39, David Woodfall wrote: > I've noticed now that my replies in that thread don't have a > In-Reply-To for some reason. When I tag one and attach it with & as > you said it joins fine and adds that. > > Why wouldn't mutt add that? It works fine eg in lists. It's ticked over 23:00 here, and I'm not recalling anything on the missing In-Reply-To headers, but if there's still poor threading after that's fixed, then here's what my notes say I did, back when: Debug: Maillist posts, lacking In-Reply-To or References headers, and with "Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re:" pollution in the Subject, started multiple threads, and mutt didn't cope: Diagn: :set ? strict_threads strict_threads is unset :set ? sort_re sort_re is set # Default reply_regexp is simplistic, though. Fix: Added in .muttrc: # Note: Keep reply_regexp lower-case, to keep it case-insensitive. # set reply_regexp="^(((re(\\[[0-9]\\])?|aw|fw|fwd|\\?\\?|):)[ \t]*)+" There are even fancier regexes in the list archive, back in 2009/2010, but they have more ambitious agendas. Erik
Re: Problem with strict_threads
On Thursday 5 July 2018 22:20, Erik Christiansen put forth the proposition: > On 05.07.18 12:53, David Woodfall wrote: > > I've just set up things so that record=^ which works fine, and I > > copied a bunch of old sent messages to a folder to see the whole > > thread. However I see the thread order is broken. > > OK, we have "set sort=threads", as the above implies some threads > showing. Yeah, I have sort=threads by default on every folder except =Sent and =Trash > > I tried setting strict_threads but it doesn't help. > > That just reduces threading, by disabling pseudo-threading. > Having $strict_threads and $sort_re unset should compensate for missing > threading headers, perhaps too much, if a subject recurs in later > threads. > > > EG I have a thread with a friend (he uses the email app in Win10 and > > the messages have outlook.com IDs) and checked all his Message-ID and > > all my In-Reply-To and they look like they should match properly. > > Each message contains the correct ID and Reference AFAICS. > > > > Any ideas what to try to solve this? > > What happens to the headers when you use & to join a tagged mail to a > thread? Presumably the thread display is now OK, and the change in the > headers will show whether it's In-Reply-To or a Reference that was > missing. (Whenever I've done that, mutt has added an In-Reply-To, IIRC.) I added a couple of binds to toggle on/off In-Reply-To and Message-ID. I've noticed now that my replies in that thread don't have a In-Reply-To for some reason. When I tag one and attach it with & as you said it joins fine and adds that. Why wouldn't mutt add that? It works fine eg in lists. -D > Erik -- In short, at least give the penguin a fair viewing. If you still don't like it, that's ok: that's why I'm boss. I simply know better than you do. -- Linus "what, me arrogant?" Torvalds, on c.o.l.advocacy .--. oo ()// ~'
Re: Problem with strict_threads
On 05.07.18 12:53, David Woodfall wrote: > I've just set up things so that record=^ which works fine, and I > copied a bunch of old sent messages to a folder to see the whole > thread. However I see the thread order is broken. OK, we have "set sort=threads", as the above implies some threads showing. > I tried setting strict_threads but it doesn't help. That just reduces threading, by disabling pseudo-threading. Having $strict_threads and $sort_re unset should compensate for missing threading headers, perhaps too much, if a subject recurs in later threads. > EG I have a thread with a friend (he uses the email app in Win10 and > the messages have outlook.com IDs) and checked all his Message-ID and > all my In-Reply-To and they look like they should match properly. > Each message contains the correct ID and Reference AFAICS. > > Any ideas what to try to solve this? What happens to the headers when you use & to join a tagged mail to a thread? Presumably the thread display is now OK, and the change in the headers will show whether it's In-Reply-To or a Reference that was missing. (Whenever I've done that, mutt has added an In-Reply-To, IIRC.) Erik
Problem with strict_threads
I've just set up things so that record=^ which works fine, and I copied a bunch of old sent messages to a folder to see the whole thread. However I see the thread order is broken. I tried setting strict_threads but it doesn't help. EG I have a thread with a friend (he uses the email app in Win10 and the messages have outlook.com IDs) and checked all his Message-ID and all my In-Reply-To and they look like they should match properly. Each message contains the correct ID and Reference AFAICS. Any ideas what to try to solve this? -D -- Eh, that's it, I guess. No 300 million dollar unveiling event for this kernel, I'm afraid, but you're still supposed to think of this as the "happening of the century" (at least until the next kernel comes along). Oh, and this is another kernel in that great and venerable "BugFree(tm)" series of kernels. So be not afraid of bugs, but go out in the streets and deliver this message of joy to the masses. -- Linus Torvalds, on releasing 1.3.27 .--. oo ()// ~'
