in-reply-to hell?

in-reply-to hell?

[Wes Hardaker]

So, my threads have been broken by many mail readers that don't do
references: headers all the time.  I thought at least at one point in
time gnus used in-reply-to as a fallback for threading?  But it
doesn't seem to use them properly (I didn't check to see if they were
broken, which I suppose they could be).  Help?

-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

Re: in-reply-to hell?

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Wes Hardaker <wes@hardakers.net> writes:

> So, my threads have been broken by many mail readers that don't do
> references: headers all the time.  I thought at least at one point in
> time gnus used in-reply-to as a fallback for threading?  But it
> doesn't seem to use them properly (I didn't check to see if they were
> broken, which I suppose they could be).  Help?

Gnus does use In-Reply-To, but mail agents like Eudora even gets
In-Reply-To wrong -- it sticks the last Message-ID from the References
header into In-Reply-To, so that it looks like it's a response to the
parent of the article it's a response to.

(Hm.  I should probably rewrite that last sentence.)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen