On Sun, 2016-09-04 at 12:59 +0100, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote: > Adam D. Barratt: > > > I'm sure I'm not the only one irritated by this, > > Then you should be looking at the Debian software that drives > https://lists.debian.org/ , which seriously mucks up subject processing, Strangely, it doesn't seem to do that for anyone else that I've ever noticed. > and not at us poor users who are long-suffering under it. Debian > software gets References: wrong, too; which is in fact the way that one > recognizes replies. Your messages have the References correct, so they thread properly. However, if the message(s) being replied to have already been deleted from the folder, there is usually no visual indication that a new message is a reply other than 'Re:'. > See RFC 2822 §3.6.5, which points out that Re: is not what you think it is Mailing lists have conventions to make them easier for people to read, that go beyond requirements of any standard. You are not following convention and you have not given any reason for this. > and describes just some of the processing that > Debian software is not doing (Try subjects with reserved punctuation > characters for even more fun!), and RFC 2822 §3.6.4, which talks about > replies and the References: header. > > * https://jdebp.eu./Proposals/gnksoa-mua.html#ProperThreading [...] This URL still doesn't work. Maybe fix that before you start lecturing about standards? So you've decided to invent and follow your own 'standard'. Great. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part