On 22May2014 20:54, Guy Gold <g...@merl.com> wrote:
On Fri,May 23 09:22:AM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
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?
Does not work for me, no. I'm trying to get 'date' to be the
main sorting criteria. In the example I provided, ideally, the two
messages from the 18th, would be at the bottom of the thread,
with the very newest one, May 18,2:28PM as the last one listed. [...]
>
> 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 └─>
Ok, question 1: do you use %d or %D for the date field in your $index_format
string?
Importantly, %D is the message date in your local time zone. If you use %d, you
get the sender's time zone (i.e., as it is in the message header), and that
will vary widely. Quite possibly producing the listing above.
Here is the same thread in my mail folder (with some stuff removed after the
">") to make the lines fit.
18May2014 18:14 list mail - ┌>
18May2014 04:51 Kevin J. McCart - ┌>
18May2014 16:58 Karl Voit - │ ┌>
18May2014 11:51 To Karl Voit - │ ┌>
18May2014 09:02 Gary Johnson - │ ├>
18May2014 07:59 Karl Voit - │┌>
18May2014 07:04 Mike Glover - ├>
18May2014 02:19 Karl Voit - Writing a wrapper for the editor: mutt
aborts in-between
Notice that all the dates within a given subthread ore in order? This makes me
think you do not have an ordering problem but a display problem.
if the entire thread was unread, and I needed to get to the three
newest messages, I would have had to bounce around a bit. If this was
a 22 message count thread, it would have been a bit harsh. In
that case, I re-sort the index, non-threaded, and that way, I'm
able to get the actual chronological order of messages, but, then
I lose the threaded advantage.
Hmm. Personally I like to read the thread, so I go the the oldest unread
message and start there. That way the replies come in a sensible order.
It sound like you want to order on thread-id (no such animal really) then
message date. Is that what you're after? But you say you want the thread
Please check your date_format for %d vs %D, and see if things only look wrong
because of time zone issues.
Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au>
