In message.el, the user should be given some variables in case he
wishes to have some control over the wads of References, and their
order.
< "Trim REFERENCES to be 21 Message-ID long or less, and fold them.
---
> "Trim REFERENCES to be jidanni:1 Message-ID long or less, and fold them.
< (le
> In message.el, the user should be given some variables in case he
> wishes to have some control over the wads of References, and their
> order.
IIRC, the order is fixed by the relevant RFC, so we can't really let the
user mess it up.
As for making 21 customizable, well it seems like a good
S> IIRC, the order is fixed by the relevant RFC, so we can't really let the
S> user mess it up.
We demand shoot-feet control. Actually here we are smarter than the
RFC. RFC? bah! KFChicken.
S> As for making 21 customizable, well it seems like a good value, what
S> with it being half of 42 and
S> IIRC, the order is fixed by the relevant RFC, so we can't really let the
S> user mess it up.
> We demand shoot-feet control. Actually here we are smarter than the
> RFC. RFC? bah! KFChicken.
Since you use a length of 1, I'm wondering why you'd care about
the ordering.
Or are you saying that wh
> oldest 21 rather than the most recent 21? That would indeed be a plain bug.
But that is what Lars said the RFC said the last time I brought this
up. Which you can see somewhere in news://news.gnus.org/gnus.gnus-bug
which is what http://gnus.org/resources.html says is the only way to
see gnus bu
On 7/26/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I mean hardwiring any number without a defvar alternative should raise
> a red flag anyway.
Good point.
> Anyway, thanks for your persistence in this matter. Farther than I got
> last time just posting to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not sure t
On Thu, Jul 26 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Or are you saying that when the 21 limit is reached it incorrectly keeps the
>> oldest 21 rather than the most recent 21?
Neither one is the case. See below.
>> That would indeed be a plain bug.
> But that is what Lars said the RFC said the la
> Not if the hardwired number is recommended by the relevant standards.
> I'm not convinced that we should have a defvar (or even a defconst for
> this).
Agreed. But it does deserve a comment justifying the value chosen.
Stefan
___
emacs-pre
On Wed, Aug 01 2007, Miles Bader wrote:
> I'm not sure that anyone actually reads [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- every bug
> report I send there seems to be entirely ignored...
Within all articles in gnus.gnus-bug, I only found 2 unanswered
messages from you (8 years ago). But it's true that there was qui
