* JimO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-04-23 19:43]: > I don't find a specification for Mutt's threading > algorithm in the docs I have, manual and faq.
which manual explains algorithms, anyway? ;-) > Maybe it's a moving target, but I bet it's pretty > stable at this point. As I understand it, Mutt > uses In-Reply-To as its highest precedence, which > makes sense, but I'm left with the following: > > What's the form of an In-Reply-To header? > What's the form of a References header? In-Reply-To: MID References: MID1 MID2 MID3 ... > Is there a function in Mutt to "force all tagged > msgs into a thread (or subthread)" or somesuch? No. > I suppose such a function would add a reference, pointing to the > earliest-dated mail in the group, to each of the other mails, > but maybe there's a problem with that simple-minded approach. indeed - that's a bad idea. > Sometimes I want to send mail to a list that should be threaded > under some topic, but it's not really in reply to any particular > piece of mail. It seems I want to send with a References header, > but not In-Reply-To, with my own unique Subject line that will start > a sub-thread. Is there a way to tell Mutt to reference a piece of > mail without replying to it? you want to send a message with a reference which is no reference? what's wrong with this picture? > I can always edit the header later after the list sends me > back my own mail, but it'd be nicer to do it at the outset. and screw it up for everybody? no, thanks. if you do that you'll be in my (mail filter's) killfile right away and off the list real soon. Sven
