Carl Peterson <carlopeter...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Tim Roberts <t...@probo.com> writes:
>>
>> > David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
>> >> How does it make it harder? As I said, replying to a digest makes no
>> >> sense with regard to message threading anyway.
>> >
>> > Of course it makes sense. I just did it, and your mailer is almost
>> > certainly showing you the proper threading, isn't it?
>>
>> No, it isn't. Wrong References: header apparently (most definitely not
>> pointing to the Message-Id: header of the article you are replying to).
>> It's not possible to go to the parent article, and it is not possible to
>> recall the entire thread from the server. Both are possible with proper
>> replies.
>>
>> Maybe you think that the Subject header is all that is needed for proper
>> threading, but of course it would not allow for the topical sort a
>> proper thread display needs to do.
>
>
> Funny thing...it showed up in my email system properly threaded.
No idea what email system you are using, but the headers on your mail
are
References: <mailman.34835.1378923505.10747.lilypond-u...@gnu.org>
<5231f387.6080...@probo.com> <87wqmmgdnq....@fencepost.gnu.org>
and when following that, one gets to my reply, Tim's posting, and then
an inaccessible message since my mail system never got to see the
digest. The In-Reply-To: header chain does just the same thing. So I
have no idea how your email system would figure out just what mail Tim
had been replying to. The information is just not there in the headers.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
