edit the subject line of a thread?

On 4/27/07, Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:04:36 -0400
> "Michael Pobega" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 03:21:39PM -0400, P Kapat wrote:
> > > OK, this is just a small nitpicking, to which even I am guilty of in
> > > the past, but I wanted to know the right mailing etiquettes. The
> > > agenda is:
> > >
> > > When replying to a mail/thread it is best not to modify the Subject
> > > line, like adding "(solved)" or something similar. Because that breaks
> > > the thread, which possibly is unintended and unwanted. In such cases,
> > > it is better to add "SOLVED" (or sometihng to that extent) in the
> > > begining of the mail body.
> > >
> > > Now I have seen this thread breaking in Gmail and Kmail, I am not sure
> > > of other frontends, like those who read the list from a news reader
> > > Knode (using gmane's servers).
> > > I am sure people might agree/disagree but I think it is worthwhile to
> > > argue. Let your opinions flow....
> > >
> >
> > Threading is done by headers as far as I know, so changing the subject
> > line shouldn't do anything. I'd suggest that you try to find another
> > MUA if yours isn't capable of doing proper threading.
> >
> > Although, as far as I know KMail is quite capable of handling threading
> > by headers.
>
> Apparently compliant MUAs thread by headers (specifically, IIUC, the
> 'In-reference-to' header), but some MUAs lack that capability (many on
> this list will call them broken) and can only thread by subject. I
> think even some compliant ones can also thread by subject, but I may be
> mistaken.

I googled around a little bit, and did some simple mailing-replying
actions.. It seems like gmail uses "subject" for threading the
conversations. Kmail uses something else (i guess, In-Reply-To). Not
just that, when you change the subject line when replying to a
thread/conversation using gmail, it "removes" the In-Reply-To header;
as a consequence any MUA ( i think) will get that messsage wrongly
threaded. So, to me it seems like a problem with gmail's mailing
system rather than MUA at the reading end... To prove the point
(hopefully!), my next mail on this thread (using gmail) will have a
modified subject line, check if the In-Reply-To header is removed, or
whether it is threaded in a proper way with whichever MUA you use at
your end..

--
Regards
PK
--------------------------------------
http://counter.li.org #402424

--

On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 16:57 -0400, P Kapat wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > Do you get a broken thread now because
> > I have added stuff to the subject?
>
> Interesting.. This time, inspite of a changed subject line, the thread
> did not break in gmail.
> So what is driving the threading? There were a few "References"
> headers and a "In-Rpely-To" header.... Any clue?
>
> > Here it is always working file.
> > Mybe you should use a better MUA?
>
> I use gmail and kmail. What better MUA do you suggest? I guess someone
> had confirmed that the thread was broken even in mutt..
>
> Lets c if this breaks...

Works in Evolution.

Probably:

References:

<20070502172024.GQ1894@freenet.de>

The bottom line being Michelle's message. Since Michelle's referenced a
couple of other references, one of which had a myriad of references
(great-great-great-grandfather was listed). This is why it still worked.
There are a couple of MUAs that are broken and only thread on subject
line and well also strip the references or only include snippets of the
message IDs in "Reference:"

Lets just complain about that certain commercial MUA. I like to complain
about it and its Corporation that authors it.
--
greg,

Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 04:57:26PM -0400, P Kapat wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> >Do you get a broken thread now because
> >I have added stuff to the subject?
>
> Interesting.. This time, inspite of a changed subject line, the thread
> did not break in gmail.
> So what is driving the threading? There were a few "References"
> headers and a "In-Rpely-To" header.... Any clue?
>
> >Here it is always working file.
> >Mybe you should use a better MUA?
>
> I use gmail and kmail. What better MUA do you suggest? I guess someone
> had confirmed that the thread was broken even in mutt..

From your tests (and my experience) it seems it will be ok as long as
you use gmail only as smtp server with a decent local MUA (like kmail
seems to be). But if you use gmail's interface it will remove relevant
headers and this will break threading on a changed subject (most
clients can do pseudo-threading by subject).

Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)

Am 2007-05-02 16:57:26, schrieb P Kapat:
> Interesting.. This time, inspite of a changed subject line, the thread
> did not break in gmail.

:-)

> So what is driving the threading? There were a few "References"
> headers and a "In-Rpely-To" header.... Any clue?

References:

> >Here it is always working file.
> >Mybe you should use a better MUA?
>
> I use gmail and kmail. What better MUA do you suggest? I guess someone
> had confirmed that the thread was broken even in mutt..

Right, because mutt reconstruct the thresd by References:

YOU CAN activate threating by Subject, but if you have a
huge mailbox of 10000 messages or more (3-6 month) you
will get funny results

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant

--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)