From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/trunk r104691: Don't reuse previous Message-id when resending. Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:28:09 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87mxh37nfp.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1309194543 28050 80.91.229.12 (27 Jun 2011 17:09:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:09:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 27 19:08:58 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QbFIw-0003RB-Gi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:08:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33437 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbFIv-0007xd-ET for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:08:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55036) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbEfa-0005kA-1W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:28:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbEfY-00008F-DE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:28:18 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:34266) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbEfX-000084-Uy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:28:16 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbEfR-0006dc-3E; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:28:09 -0400 In-reply-to: <87mxh37nfp.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:141078 Archived-At: > Using a new Message-ID can't do any harm. Maybe not to you, but in case of partial failure it will create a new subthread, confusing participants in the original thread. I cannot follow that concretely. However, it is perfectly normal to write multiple responses to a single incoming message. Retrying the first response with a new Message-ID is a special case of that, so it can't be wrong. I am confident that any programs designed to keep track of threads do something reasonable in this case. > It isn't wrong. Sorry, Richard, that is not yours to decide. It is not up to you what the GNU Project can decide. From RFC 5322: The RFC forgot to send an army with you, so it cannot expect to be obeyed. In the GNU Project, we do not obey standards -- we consider them, then DTRT. Often TRT is to do what the standard says. Sometimes TRT is something else. For instance, GCC doesn't obey the ANSI C spec unless you use --pedantic. Bash does not obey the POSIX spec unless you set POSIXLY_CORRECT. You can make arguments about what is TRT, but they can only succeed if they do not presume the RFC has authority. in general it is the sender's decision, not the implementer's I agree, and that's how it is. This variable specifies the way the mail buffer is initialized. The user has ultimate control. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org, www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use free telephony http://directory.fsf.org/category/tel/