On 2016-09-04 at 07:59, 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, 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. Counterpoint: I see messages threaded hierarchically under one another, as is correct, with no issues, on all Debian mailing lists to which I subscribe. Checking a few messages randomly (from this thread, including at least two of your own) shows that the References: header is populated, and that the Message-ID(s) with which it is populated refer to the parent message in the thread and/or to the grandparent, exactly as would seem to be appropriate. IOW, the evidence immediately available to me seems to indicate that your claim is not correct. Moreover, even if the mailing list software did/does get this wrong, that would not be an excuse for dropping the Re: from the Subject line. That flag is not only (and, indeed, properly not at all) for use by the mail client; it is also to provide information to the person who reads the mail, as it provides a better indication that "this mail is a reply" than is otherwise available at a glance. (Certainly the mail-reader cannot be expected to check References: headers manually every time they look at the list of available messages.) To arbitrarily drop that additional flag would require more reason than "just because". -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature