Re: Quick question for interest's sake

On Donnerstag, 8. März 2018 12:56:56 CET Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 March 2018 19:42:27 GMT Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > If the "Standard Mailing List" aggregration is enabled, then KMail threads
> > (in this order of preference) by:
> > 1.) In-Reply-To
> > 2.) References
> > 3.) Subject
> > 
> > ... I don't understand why KMail doesn't thread by subject instead.
> 
> It's more logical, for one thing: if a message is a reply to another one, it
> should appear just after it. The thread is linked by all three fields, but
> the Subject header can be changed at whim by a user or his MUA. That would
> destroy the thread.
> 
> Maybe I've taken you out of context...

I think you have. I blame the dreaded language barrier.

I was wondering why KMail doesn't thread by subject as last resort since, in 
case of the Phabricator emails, no suitable link could be established by the 
first two criteria.

I fully agree that threading by subject alone should only happen as last 
resort. And even then it's questionable. For example, a lot of automated 
emails (e.g. by monitoring systems or build systems) have the same subject for 
unrelated emails.


Regards,
Ingo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EABECAB0WIQRxKgkQMhrHYtSAVAgadH5FMOC52AUCWqF6OwAKCRAadH5FMOC5
2CO4AKCpi6RBCpjlLVVHA8eDAFMMmwLlcgCcDt+TLXiXsZRmq1fS1FMdeKYYl1I=
=y5og
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----