On 2016-04-22 at 09:20, Nicolas George wrote: > Le quartidi 4 floréal, an CCXXIV, The Wanderer a écrit : >> If the list software did this modification for _all_ messages, not >> just ones from Gmail addresses, I don't see how it would break >> threading > > It breaks it for the *senders*: they would have the message in their > "sent" archive with the message-id chosen by the MUA and the rest of > the thread connected to the message (in-reply-to and references) with > a different message-id. I'm not sure this would actually manifest the way you're describing it - but I'm not positive it wouldn't, either, and I don't care to invest the brainpower in working it out for certain right now. >> Interesting. Do you have any evidence for the idea that it uses >> more than just Message-ID? I can't prove that it doesn't, but I've >> never seen anything that I recall to indicate that it does. > > A long time ago, I experimented with in-reply-to and references in > order to see how gmail decided if a mail belongs in a thread, and my > conclusion was that it relied more on the subject field than anything > else. It was a long time ago. For threading, you're probably right. For message uniqueness for its duplicate filtering, however, the Subject obviously isn't enough to go on - and I strongly suspect that Message-ID is the key. >> For myself, one major reason (not the only one) is that the >> received copy is often different from the sent copy - modified >> message headers (e.g. by adding List-ID), added mailing-list >> footer, et cetera. > > True. A gamil users could check to see if it is possible to obtain > that information. I suspect the misfeature belongs in gmail's web > interface, actually, and the mails are really present in the archive > and accessible through IMAP. Nope - or if so, it's either a new-these-last-few-years development, or for some reason specific to just IMAP. I access my sole Gmail account via POP3, and the "duplicate" messages don't come through there either - or at least they didn't back in 2009, I don't often send mail through that account (for this very reason). I think this really is an "optimization" on Google's end, to save on storage space since they can already show the "same" message in the right place thanks to their Web interface's fancy search wrangling. -- 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