From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug tracker breaks rmail-next-same-subject Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:03:21 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20081212214756.GI24493@volo.donarmstrong.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1229123121 5924 80.91.229.12 (12 Dec 2008 23:05:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 23:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Don Armstrong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 13 00:06:26 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LBH4R-0007U6-4I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:05:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49168 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LBH3F-00080K-Nn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:04:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LBH3C-0007zm-FV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:04:02 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LBH3B-0007yx-1i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:04:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55323 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LBH3A-0007yu-UA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:04:00 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:59283) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LBH3A-0000j9-HQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:04:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1LBH2X-00016R-Ad; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:03:21 -0500 In-reply-to: <20081212214756.GI24493@volo.donarmstrong.com> (message from Don Armstrong on Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:47:56 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:106854 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:47:56 -0800 > From: Don Armstrong > > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > The bug tracker modifies the Subject lines, which breaks > > `rmail-next-same-subject' and `rmail-previous-same-subject'. > > These commands have a fundamental problem; they really should be > rmail-next-in-thread, rmail-previous-in-thread. Threads are not guaranteed to exist in mailing lists, AFAIK. > > I think it's not clean to depend on Subject mangling by specific > > servers. > > That's why References: and In-Reply-To: exist. You are evidently assuming that everybody uses MUA that preserve these headers as they should. The reality is a bit different. Anyway, these two commands served me well until now; it sounds a bit ironic, to say the least, that an Emacs bug tracker would break their utility.