Bryan Breen Bryan.C.Breen.1 at
Tue Feb 25 23:32:14 PST 2003

At 01:24 2/26/03 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 01:03:58 +0000 (UTC)
>Bryan.C.Breen.1 at (Bryan Breen) wrote:
>> At 00:22 2/26/03 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:
>> >On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 23:58:39 +0000 (UTC)
>> >Bryan.C.Breen.1 at (Bryan Breen) wrote:
>> >
>> >your threading is weird. your replies come up at the same level as my
>> >posts, not below them...
>> Odd. From the message headers of my last message in this thread:
>Hmm. not what I see.

>From both those test messages I just sent using the two options for
replying that the Eudora version I'm using has, they both created these
identical headers:

Message-Id: < at>
In-Reply-To: <20030226012432.315c9401.spyro at>
References: <20030225180843.722a99e0.spyro at>
 <3E5B6826.32748.11384C9 at localhost>
 <20030225191331.66476a7e.spyro at>
 <b3guua$3q9$1 at>
 < at>
 < at>

And the message of yours that you mentioned before:

Message-ID: <20030226002254.5df09e83.spyro at>
References: <20030225180843.722a99e0.spyro at>
	<3E5B6826.32748.11384C9 at localhost>
	<20030225191331.66476a7e.spyro at>
	<b3guua$3q9$1 at>
	< at>

And the message of yours that I just replied to:

Message-ID: <20030226012432.315c9401.spyro at>
References: <20030225180843.722a99e0.spyro at>
	<3E5B6826.32748.11384C9 at localhost>
	<20030225191331.66476a7e.spyro at>
	<b3guua$3q9$1 at>
	< at>
	< at>

You're saying that the second two sets message headers (yours) are creating
the correctly threading, but the first set of message headers (mine) are not.

I noticed that your news reader is not using the "In-Reply-To" header that
mine is. I'm definitely not up to date on the most recent (or any for that
matter) RFC for correct E-mail headers for proper threading. My only guess
is that your client is placing the value in the most recent Reference field
as what my client is respectively placing in the In-Reply-To field.

Just doing a cursory look at a random smattering of recent reply posts to
different threads on these lists seem to indicate a pretty inconsistent
behavior by various mail/news clients in this regard. Some are using the
"In-Reply-To" header, others are not. Some of those that are using it, also
copy that value to the most recent "References" header, others (like mine)
are not.

>Looks like the problems at your end :)

It very well could be that the "In-Reply-To" field Eudora is using has been
deprecated (this particular version of the Eudora mail client is several
years old). Which in one sense, means that the "problem" is at my end.
Though *I* don't have any "problem" with it at all. And *you* are the first
to mention it (directly to me) after nearly a year of my casual involvement
on these LFS mailing lists (all of which time I'm fairly certain 95% or
more of my messages came from this mail client). So the "problem" doesn't
measure up to much it seems. I know some folks have expressed concerns over
incorrectly threading messages in the past. I do believe (or did at the
time) most of those complaints were in response to new topics as replies to
old threads. Never was I under the impression they were making a reference
directly to any of my posts.

However, something so obvious to human eyes ("In-Reply-To"... a.k.a. "The
message that follows bellow is IN-REPLY-TO the message that is listed right
here") should be child's play for current versions of mail/news clients to
interpret. If I cared, I'd be a bit disappointed in my mail/news client if
it couldn't perform this simple translation (as your specific version of
Sylpheed apparently can not). I'd be particularly disappointed if this
translation would have the value that it apparently does for you (you
wouldn't have mentioned it if it didn't have some value to you). As I've
mentioned in a previous message, this version of Eudora that I'm using
doesn't support displaying messages grouped in threads. Therefore, I have
no care, one way or the other, on its treatment of this threading. I'm glad
it appears to be conforming to a fairly obvious and non-proprietary
standard. Am I concerned that this standard doesn't seem to be universal?
No. It's beneath me... more beneath me than caring about GPG signatures. :P

Considering all that, the "problem" would seem to be at your end.
(Or anyone else's that is using a mail/news client not capable of this
simple translation.)

And by it being on "your end", I'm saying that, if you are looking for a
resolution to the "problem", the effort will have to be conducted from your
side to obtain a mail/news client capable of recognizing this (and other)
fairly obvious header(s).

As I've mentioned, there is no chance I'm ever going to use a different
mail client from this location as long as my current one is operating
correctly (for all intents, purposes and observations that I can make). So
I've officially cataloged this "problem" as "irrelevant"... though, on a
whim, I may shift it to say... "inconsequential", "pointless", or even file
it away under "yeah... so?". :)

Thank you, come again.

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-chat' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-chat mailing list