Seth Spitzer wrote:
>
> Stuart Ballard wrote:
>
> > Dan Mosedale wrote:
> >
> >>Is that what's actually implemented in Mozilla? A certain amount of
> >>Mozilla's mail-news code descended from the Netscape 4.x code base, so
> >>I wonder if this isn't still the 4.x algorithm rather than the
> >>algorithm described on that page. It might be worthwhile to figure
> >>that out, and if it is still the 4.x algorithm, file a bug in Bugzilla
> >>to get it changed...
> >>
> >
> > *boggle*
> >
> > From the original roadmap at
> > http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/roadmap-26-Oct-1998.html:
> >
> > "It has been over five months since I posted to mozilla.general my
> > then-current thoughts on the Mozilla browser development schedule. That
> > schedule listed only one large feature, mail/news integration, and put
> > off enumerating the rest until "later, [...] barring a better idea."
> >
> > Since then, a lot of great work has been done by all mozilla.org
> > developers, fixing warnings and bugs, porting and cleaning up code,
> > improving performance, refining downloadable chrome, setting up the
> > autoconf build system, etc. But the mail/news code from Netscape never
> > arrived."
> >
> > Netscape never released the 4.x (or even the half-way-to-5.x) mail/news
> > code. How can anything in Mozilla be derived from it?
>
> A lot has happened since 10-1998.
>
> The original 4.x mailnews code was never released (because it contained
> some proprietary 3rd party code). But what could be salvaged and
> brought over to mozilla, has been.
so the threading code *is* based on the 4.x MailNews...
>
> The mailnews UI has completely been re-written. 4.x was written in
> platform specific code, like Motif, the mozilla UI is written in XUL.
> So none of the UI code was brought over.
...just not the interface stuff - got it.
>
> But plenty of back end code came over, including some of the threading code.
>
> So, mozilla has similar threading code to what 4.x has. As was
> previously pointed out, nsMsgThreadDBView.cpp is the place to start
> looking. (sorry, no documents on how the threading code works.)
Right, so in otherwords the threading *could* be improved if we were to
go with Jamie's algorithm?
>
> If you find problems with the threading code, log a bug. To help us
> figure out the problem, copy your thread to a local folder and attach
> the local folder (it's just a file in the Berkeley mbox format) to the
> bug report.
yeah, I'll try to get to it Seth - I think that the things that have
annoyed me about the threading so far are the sorts of things Jamie's
algorithm covers. However implemented though, a couple of improvements
would be neat. And the other things I've commented on that you've
suggested I raise bugzillas on. I just have to find what I did with my
bugzilla reg note...
Jeremy
