From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE23E431FBC for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:08:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id enTJbBWWKaqo for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:08:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from VA3EHSOBE002.bigfish.com (va3ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.180.12]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAAB9431FAE for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:08:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail132-va3-R.bigfish.com (10.7.14.245) by VA3EHSOBE002.bigfish.com (10.7.40.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.240.5; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:08:03 +0000 Received: from mail132-va3 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail132-va3-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE6613B81D3; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:08:02 +0000 (UTC) X-SpamScore: -20 X-BigFish: VPS-20(zz1432R1453M98dNzz1202hzzz32i6bh61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 Received: from mail132-va3 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail132-va3 (MessageSwitch) id 1261606079137914_2864; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from VA3EHSMHS036.bigfish.com (unknown [10.7.14.237]) by mail132-va3.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 818591080057; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:07:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ausb3extmailp02.amd.com (163.181.251.22) by VA3EHSMHS036.bigfish.com (10.7.99.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.0.482.32; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:07:55 +0000 Received: from ausb3twp02.amd.com ([163.181.250.38]) by ausb3extmailp02.amd.com (Switch-3.2.7/Switch-3.2.7) with ESMTP id nBNM7p9m029510; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:07:54 -0600 X-WSS-ID: 0KV4LH1-02-58D-02 X-M-MSG: Received: from sausexbh2.amd.com (SAUSEXBH2.amd.com [163.181.22.102]) by ausb3twp02.amd.com (Tumbleweed MailGate 3.7.2) with ESMTP id 26AA6FCC3F5; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:07:48 -0600 (CST) Received: from sausexmb6.amd.com ([163.181.49.140]) by sausexbh2.amd.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:07:49 -0600 Received: from optimon.amd.com ([163.181.34.104]) by sausexmb6.amd.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:07:49 -0600 Received: from mhdc-ns01.amd.com (mhdc-ns01.amd.com [165.204.35.147]) by optimon.amd.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id nBNM7nCG013525; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:07:49 -0600 Received: from testarossa.amd.com (testarossa.amd.com [165.204.147.44]) by mhdc-ns01.amd.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nBNM7m1n018616; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:07:48 -0700 (MST) Received: (from manderso@localhost) by testarossa.amd.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id nBNM7lDc013462; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:07:47 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: testarossa.amd.com: manderso set sender to MarkR.Andersom@amd.com using -f From: Mark Anderson To: Marten Veldthuis , Carl Worth , notmuch In-Reply-To: <87my1kkzbn.fsf@marten.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> References: <1260400470-sup-5775@testarossa> <87ws0ug23f.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87ljha3avx.fsf@home.veldthuis.com> <87ocm64ivu.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87my1kkzbn.fsf@marten.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:07:47 -0700 Message-ID: <3wdzl59mjik.fsf@testarossa.amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2009 22:07:49.0386 (UTC) FILETIME=[5D5DCEA0:01CA841C] X-Reverse-DNS: ausb3extmailp02.amd.com Subject: Re: Threading X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:08:06 -0000 On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:54:20 +0100, Marten Veldthuis wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:30:13 -0800, Carl Worth wrote: > > But I still have a hard time justifying user operations to manipulate > > threading. The whole point of threading is to make it faster to process > > and read messages. But manual operations like joining and splitting > > threads seem like the user just doing more work, and that *after* having > > read the messages. So that seems mostly backwards to me. > > By the way, Outlook & Exchange suck (or at least some versions do), and > don't seem to generate In-Reply-To and References: headers. Just got a > mail which prompted me to write this mail. I'd really like to be able to > join messages in a case like this. It's actually worse than that. I was looking into why some of my threads weren't coalescing. Some of it seems to be a very difficult bug DB that doesn't use identical Message-ID's to refer to the parent bug mail. I don't know how that works at all. Sometimes it uses the same Message-ID, but sometimes it changes a number in the ID. However, this isn't the worst news, because I work with a lot of Exchange users, and I noticed that their mail was also refusing to thread. I was looking at the message bodies, and they led me to these links about mail processing. The problem identified: http://blog.postmaster.gr/2007/12/11/trying-to-make-use-of-outlooks-thread-index-header/ How to read it, or how Exchange goes its own way: http://blog.postmaster.gr/2007/12/23/more-fun-with-message-threading/ With a fairly loose understanding of how notmuch detects threads, and how much information it places in the Xapian database (only the msg-id?), I can't suggest much of the how. But I would like to propose that we consider handling the Exchange non-standard threading method as well as the RFC822 threading in the headers. Reactions? -Mark