I'm pretty sure that the right answer depends on what software is being used to determine the threading. Every mail (and Usenet newsgroup) message includes (in the header) a Message-Id: header. This is the one from Detlef's original message:
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and when you Reply to a message, your email program "should" include, in the header of your reply message, an In-Reply-To: header that refers to it: In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as well as having its own Message-Id: header. That IRT header was in Waylan's reply, and it of course has its own Message-Id: Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> My response to Waylan's message will include In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and any reply to this message will have an In-Reply-To: with the Message-ID: of this message (I don't know what it is, as it's not created until I send it). There are also References: headers that can list multiple other message ids, but the mechanism is a bit less obvious than the In-Reply-To: mechanism. So, Detlef, it's possible that your email program is not producing an In-Reply-To: header when you use the program's Reply feature; that would be a bug. It's possible that you're not using the Reply feature of your email program, but are instead starting a new message when replying -- so your email program doesn't know to include an In-Reply-To: header. It's possible that the threading mechanism whose result you're seeing relies at least as much on References: headers as on In-Reply-To: headers, and that your email program doesn't send what's expected. Finally, it's possible that the position / presence of the Re: is relevant, but that's a very non-robust way of doing threading. After all, how many sets of unrelated messages have had subjects like these over time? Is this a bug? Newbie question ADO.NET so that using just the subject is not going to produce accurate threading, while using In-Reply-To: (and/or References:) would not incorrectly intermingle those unrelated threads. Good luck... At 12:02 PM 1/12/2006, Waylan Limberg wrote >The reply subject to this message should be: > Re: [IronPython] Answers not added to the thread >but not > [IronPython] Re: Answers not added to the thread > >In other words, the "Re:" can only be added to the very begining of >the subject including the [list label] added by the list system. As >an alternative, you could just never include "Re:" in your subject. >Then the subject would always be the same - and that should work as >well. > >On 1/12/06, Stute, Detlef ALRT/EEG4 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> A short non IronPython question. >> What must be the subject line of an answer to be integrated into the message >> thread? >> My answers to any questions are not added to the thread, the occur as a new >> independent message. >> >> Mit freundlichen Grüßen/ kind regards/ Cordiali Saluti >> SEATEC GmbH >> Detlef Stute >> www.seatec-gmbh.com >-- >---- >Waylan Limberg >[EMAIL PROTECTED] J. Merrill / Analytical Software Corp _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
