From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Uday S Reddy 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 18:47:15 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87mxh37nfp.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1309211737 3657 80.91.229.12 (27 Jun 2011 21:55:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:55:37 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 27 23:55:32 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 1QbJmF-0007MI-Vq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:55:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51979 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbJmF-0005Q8-5L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:55:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51164) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbJls-0005MV-V4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:55:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbJlr-0005lN-5d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:55:08 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:40549) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QbJlq-0005k6-P3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:55:07 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QbJlp-0007Aw-40 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:55:05 +0200 Original-Received: from cpc10-harb6-0-0-cust112.perr.cable.virginmedia.com ([92.232.137.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:55:05 +0200 Original-Received: from usr.vm.rocks by cpc10-harb6-0-0-cust112.perr.cable.virginmedia.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:55:05 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 26 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cpc10-harb6-0-0-cust112.perr.cable.virginmedia.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:141094 Archived-At: On 6/27/2011 5:28 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: > > 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. Something "reasonable" can be done. But I don't think it is ideal. If there are two copies of the same message in the mail folder with different Message-ID's, then some responses would get threaded under one copy and the others under the other copy, causing confusion. If the user happens to delete one of the copies, since it is logically a duplicate, then the responses threaded under it would get messed up. On the other hand, I know from experience that dealing with duplicate copies of messages is surprisingly tricky. So, I can sympathize with the problems of mail client developers, and not being able to handle duplicate copies with different dates. Hopefully, this doesn't happen too often. Cheers, Uday