From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC5C26DE0243 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 08:48:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KZ4hqUJsME51 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 08:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.solardns.com (mx1.solardns.com [109.73.127.119]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B4FD6DE01C2 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 08:48:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [213.129.84.218] (helo=luna.solardns.com) by mx1.solardns.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1an6jy-0001TP-5t for notmuch@notmuchmail.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 16:48:37 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=deptj.eu; s=default; h=Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:To:Subject:From; bh=LpqtfOJMdLepbJXMyWJGtYJua5Flr77g71ejsyFzJ0Y=; b=VNYqY7nAguM1SYhTOoJgF9VR9N +zHOcA7OMM+cZQoLA/fMVEIN8VP0WKnev79Gjj+0tL57LnJpfALRGF1GdRppOpn+KJmQC126pqqU0 cAdpLvhFFUBwOwBYlVEuGBHY2Q54g74h6M+2IiHZ1t3/gpcPbq6J9osDe2zZjs4yJdvA=; Received: from [86.214.249.225] (port=38288 helo=bruno.deptj.eu) by luna.solardns.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86_1) (envelope-from ) id 1an6c5-003zNx-DG for notmuch@notmuchmail.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 16:40:25 +0100 Received: from eric by bruno.deptj.eu with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1an6c4-0002YK-KU for notmuch@notmuchmail.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 17:40:24 +0200 From: Eric Subject: Re: Breaking a really long thread To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org In-Reply-To: <87k2kd8r6d.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> References: <87k2kd8r6d.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> Message-ID: <85c5b3ffdcb6f033169ecde57283515081233436-NM@bruno.deptj.eu> Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 17:38:21 +0200 (CEST) X-AuthUser: deptjeu X-Filter-ID: s0sct1PQhAABKnZB5plbIZxxbsbMXbbOVqDrOlLQDPCKLoLP9dSDpksiPa3sfcfQiw3bi2TEXpBy KOgMDJLxZ2gLr13hkJnqYlE8dI2PqoFC/lGsrXcsS0xY0J18f6o7xB66CWvXcfKDfXjTU++u68NK eZ+sg/ydBcEFZoBTCD6/UXKtgO6TCHXruigtupTXZuM7jUXIESohoO51xWmU8U0XxLGz4gGrl7np YUMMsx7Zx6js8RMGZ+eyCM03IideZE/8G6RrW+hPYRmHOym9VEp4OmAp9SwcFw57ijAOXur1H/aA warQpYDOYx/6JtUOKIpz/KyJk6xidDbrtJGeIvwS+mRNB2u5eXMTyiRDCl4blv/7/GYDGL6pBAPx 3RhxuHrpSpJU4PQlqFj9797wgsGhIeDBws4kvu4hgViYIJSOH7FelTFEA57OugCjQqJvq5XDlSi1 S/CAqp6x6giLUpAadaOpLL7vzAlHz9Vt0lJbH3q7FSJEAvmcpRDg+DcXMCx8qKfWo/2nfeswSb/v XOidX4Ts4xdG+C13IyWeZaJClvAWyUAUCSYHhmge3quet8geXjZWRvaT/RbJ/nX/IFFm7SbdEzck 901Ob2Iq9tC/Vh1lis0iI/S1HLwoHXf0 X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@mx1.solardns.com X-Filter-Fingerprint: IFrWXGses7OKB5S5G8/dJdIz5bb8V0ykx8BnFBnunHBA3cTUQ1R++keuE7RDJ8Kg3RbMLUalw1oC mj99/u+PoqoVy8a3lsStJtAvpObFX0XnhRv/ZJ3kEy8bfiAr+Fb/UpndEJ0YoaLytXXo8BMTaVt0 ARHRi6XGuAluI1udprEFZG3LO9fkj7mb1+yRqli/d+zCSxvHphGqsF3hVtrEAf060QZ1FCJg7pbn CIpFp9M/hyUYo7G4LptAg5oSVRfFcobWokYzpFpNjdVH7bJEoA== X-Originating-IP: 213.129.84.218 X-SpamExperts-Domain: out.solardns.com X-SpamExperts-Username: 213.129.84.218 Authentication-Results: solardns.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=213.129.84.218@out.solardns.com X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.07) X-Recommended-Action: accept X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 15:48:49 -0000 On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:00:26 +0100, Mark Walters wrote: > On Mon, 04 Apr 2016, Eric wrote: >> On Sat, 02 Apr 2016 06:56:12 -0700, David Mazieres wrote: >>> David Bremner writes: >>> >>>> David Mazieres writes: >>>> >>>>> Is there any way to break an existing thread (so as to start over with a >>>>> smaller thread), or otherwise to tweak the threading rules so that a >>>>> particular References header gets ignored. >>>> >>>> Currently there is no way to do this, as threads are "stateless" >>>> i.e. created on the fly by _notmuch_create_thread based only on >>>> immutable mail data. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>>>> It's annoyingly slow to open >>>>> a thread with 10,000 messages just to read one SMS. I'm almost tempted >>>>> to mangle the messages on delivery and remove the References header >>>>> before notmuch sees them, but it would be nice to have a cleaner >>>>> solution, as there are other situations in which one might want to >>>>> "reset" a really long thread. >>>> >>>> Like this thread ;). >>> >>> Oops, sorry for the irrelevant thread inclusion. I guess emacs adds the >>> References header after a message is sent is sent? In my setup, the >>> easiest way to post to a mailing list is to reply to an existing message >>> (since I subscribe to each list under a different email address). I >>> tried to start a new thread by deleting the In-Reply-To and header which >>> was all I saw, but I guess the References header got inserted later... >> >> Neither notmuch emacs nor any other email client has any business >> inserting a References header after the user "presses Send". On a new >> message it shouldn't exist unless inserted manually, and on a reply it >> should come from the replied-to message (and be changed) before you start >> "replying". More likely that (if you didn't miss it) it was not shown >> to you although it existed - that would count as a bug in my opinion >> (I don't use emacs for anything, not even notmuch). > > By default the reference header is hidden. It is controlled by > message-hidden-headers which you can customize. (Note notmuch adds > user-agent to this list via notmuch-mua-hidden-header.) Ah. Well of course I didn't know that since I don't use emacs. I guess that if the OP is going to use reply to start new threads he should unhide it. >> Actually the message you replied to has no References header, but notmuch >> reply (command line) to it generates both References and In-Reply-To >> (same content). I assume notmuch emacs does the same. I don't believe >> that References should be generated in this situation, its only use >> would be by a threading algorithm that doesn't use In-Reply-To, and I >> would consider that a bug in said algorithm. > > That isn't my reading of RFC2822 (section 3.6.4): > > The "References:" field will contain the contents of the parent's > "References:" field (if any) followed by the contents of the parent's > "Message-ID:" field (if any). OK, I guess it should be there. In which case it shouldn't default to hidden in any MUA, far too many people use the reply-for-new approach without understanding it. >> Actually I think there should be a "reply as new" option which uses >> the other message but does not add either In-Reply-To or References >> (and does not carry the latter forward if it exists). > > That would be possible. If you don't actually want to include the > message itself then "c f" to stash the from, and then pasting that as > the "to" address gets pretty close. Eric -- ms fnd in a lbry