On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 16:57 -0400, P Kapat wrote: > On 5/2/07, Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do you get a broken thread now because > > I have added stuff to the subject? > > Interesting.. This time, inspite of a changed subject line, the thread > did not break in gmail. > So what is driving the threading? There were a few "References" > headers and a "In-Rpely-To" header.... Any clue? > > > Here it is always working file. > > Mybe you should use a better MUA? > > I use gmail and kmail. What better MUA do you suggest? I guess someone > had confirmed that the thread was broken even in mutt.. > > Lets c if this breaks...
Works in Evolution.
Probably:
References:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The bottom line being Michelle's message. Since Michelle's referenced a
couple of other references, one of which had a myriad of references
(great-great-great-grandfather was listed). This is why it still worked.
There are a couple of MUAs that are broken and only thread on subject
line and well also strip the references or only include snippets of the
message IDs in "Reference:"
Lets just complain about that certain commercial MUA. I like to complain
about it and its Corporation that authors it.
--
greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
