From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/49967 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ami Fischman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: A T more intelligent than ^ ? Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 18:04:42 -0800 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1044756293 30919 80.91.224.249 (9 Feb 2003 02:04:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 02:04:53 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18hgpv-00082R-00 for ; Sun, 09 Feb 2003 03:04:51 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18hgq5-0006wj-00; Sat, 08 Feb 2003 20:05:01 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sat, 08 Feb 2003 20:05:58 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA26112 for ; Sat, 8 Feb 2003 20:05:47 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18hgnl-0007yZ-00 for ; Sun, 09 Feb 2003 03:02:37 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: ding@hpc.uh.edu Original-Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18hgnj-0007yQ-00 for ; Sun, 09 Feb 2003 03:02:35 +0100 Original-Lines: 28 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.090015 (Oort Gnus v0.15) Emacs/21.2.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Cancel-Lock: sha1:DtcI+UnOKPYknD3NCtGe6g9W9qg= Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49967 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49967 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: [...] > Not quite -- `A T' uses the normal Gnus threading code, which > examines References (and if you're not using NOV) In-Reply-To. `^' > also does this, but References and/or In-Reply-To may be broken in > interesting ways, so it is possible that `A T' gives different > results than `^'. Sometimes better, sometimes worse, I'd have > thought. The message I'm using (the followup with missing References header) has no In-Reply-To header either, so A T must also be looking at the subject header to determine threading. But, given that sometimes `^' just gives up, couldn't we have it at least attempt to pick up the nearest article that A T finds? Seems like a logical fallback to me... To emphasize, neither In-Reply-To nor References appears in the headers of the followup at all. The complete list of headers (after gnus pulled it in) are: X-From-Line, Return-Path, Delivered-To, Received, X-Gnus-Mail-Source, Message-Id, X-Mailer, Date, From, To, Subject, Mime-Version, Content-Type, Content-Transfer-Encoding, Content-Disposition, Lines, and Xref. Nothing about what this message is a reply or followup to... Cheers, -- Ami Fischman usenet@fischman.org