On 22May2014 17:19, Guy Gold <g...@merl.com> wrote:
Here are the relevant parts from .muutrc: set sort=threads
set sort_aux=reverse-last-date-received
I use:
sort=reverse-threads
sort_aux=last-date
for most folders. (Spam folders I sort by subject, it groups better for mass
discarding.)
FOr me, this places the most recent messages at the top, which discourages me
from replying before being properly caught up on the whole thread. And I use
late-date instaed of reverse-last-date-received because I care when the message
was authored, not when it was received: better logical flow.
The above places the thread with the newest message on top,
with the next newest under it, an so on. Reading through
.muttrc, It's not the best way to sort, but, I got used it.
I'm trying to understand if it's 'normal' (wink: Derek
Martin, if you copy) to have most of my threads sorted
not-really-through-date-received.
I have no idea if it is normal. Besides, that should be irrelevant. Does it
work for you? If so, why? When not, why not?
In the same thread, a message from 14:00 will display above
a message from 13:59, and the same goes for messages days
apart. On a thread with 3+ messages, I start to sort
messages mentally, in order to follow correct order.
This is why I sort on the message date instead of its physical arrival time.
Is it a valid function of how mutt sorts threads, or, am I
to blame ?
It is valid in that it is what you asked for. Whether what you asked for is
sane is another matter.
The question is: why date-received instead of date? For me, "date" is the
relevant criterion.
Here's an example of how a recent thread, in this mailing
list, is presented, in my mutt index.
Sat,May 17 12:19:PM Karl Voit Writing a wrapper for the editor:
mutt aborts in-between
Sat,May 17 02:51:PM Kevin J. McCarthy ├─>
Sun,May 18 04:14:AM Chris Green │ └─>
Sat,May 17 05:04:PM Mike Glover └─>
Sat,May 17 05:59:PM Karl Voit └─>
Sat,May 17 09:51:PM Cameron Simpson ├─>
Sun,May 18 02:58:AM Karl Voit │ └─>
Sat,May 17 07:02:PM Gary Johnson └─>
I'm not sure what you dislike in this listing.
Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au>
A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature
replaces it with. - Tenessee Williams
