On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 13:25 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Which I said in my third post on this topic. However it's not only
> the 'subject' sort which suffers from this issue. The 'date' sort,
> which I have seen and tested personally - at a meeting of Company
> Directors, thank you very much - i
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 20:06 +, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 01:18 +0200, Ángel González wrote:
> > Ángel wrote:
> > > Apparently it is being marked as a reply to the digest, not to the
> > > individual message included on it.
> > (...)
> > > If at least you had stated what
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 01:18 +0200, Ángel González wrote:
> Ángel wrote:
> > Apparently it is being marked as a reply to the digest, not to the
> > individual message included on it.
> (...)
> > If at least you had stated what steps you were following for reply, or
> > how digests helps you, maybe
I can't work out where this thread is currently, so excuse me for
replying to the original message.
One thing you never said, or I can't recall seeing is what type of mail
account you use, but since you are worried about moving mail around, I
presume these are POP accounts.
>
> I am having to c
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 13:25 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> The 'date' sort, which I have seen and tested personally - at a
> meeting of Company Directors, thank you very much - is also broken at
> least in 3.4.4.
Most of the times I sorted and still sort by date, but _without_ "Group
By Threads" ena
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 13:25 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2014, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> > ...
> > If I sort by subject, I just see one other mail with the same
> subject
> > and also no follow-ups.
> >
> > If I scroll through the received mails I find a few other mails
Hi there,
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
...
If I sort by subject, I just see one other mail with the same subject
and also no follow-ups.
If I scroll through the received mails I find a few other mails with the
same subject.
...
Which I said in my third post on this topic. Howeve
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 11:59 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> > If you break threading ...
>
> Nabble manages to follow the threads, why can't your mail client?
Presumably Nabble is using Subject threading. Evo uses standard
RFC-compliant header threading, as do the vast majority of non Webmail
client
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 11:59 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> > If you break threading ...
>
> Nabble manages to follow the threads, why can't your mail client?
Actually at least this last mail from you shows
In-Reply-To:
References
Hi there,
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
If you break threading ...
Nabble manages to follow the threads, why can't your mail client?
http://gnome-evolution-general.1774414.n4.nabble.com/Restoring-data-to-new-HDD-td4659906.html
Look, this all started because I tried to help
Ángel wrote:
> Apparently it is being marked as a reply to the digest, not to the
> individual message included on it.
(...)
> If at least you had stated what steps you were following for reply, or
> how digests helps you, maybe we could have suggested an even better
> procedure (eg based on the ml
Each of your emails have created a new thread, Ged.
In cronological order:
Your email
contains:
> In-Reply-To:
> References:
but it was a reply to <1414029104.2922.3.ca...@centurylink.net> so
should have contained that.
Your email
contains:
> In-Reply-To:
> References:
but it should hav
On Fri, 2014-10-24 at 13:07 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> > ... the easiest solution is not to use digests, which are a hangover
> > from the distant past and provide no benefit nowadays.
>
> I see no problem; equally I see no need
Hi there,
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
... the easiest solution is not to use digests, which are a hangover
from the distant past and provide no benefit nowadays.
I see no problem; equally I see no need for any solution.
I'm the one to decide what benefits I derive from di
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 19:10 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> > P.S.: By the way, your messages are breaking threading, probably a
> > mail client bug?
>
> No bug. I'm on the digest list. (And I use Alpine. :)
For whatever reason, your messages are not properly threaded, e.g. your
reply to Milan did
Hi there,
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Milan Crha wrote:
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 14:30 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
Unfortunately the version of Evolution currently in Wheezy is more or
less useless. I can't for the life of me understand why it's in
there.
...
could you be "a bit more" specific, please?
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 14:30 +0100, G.W. Haywood wrote:
> Unfortunately the version of Evolution currently in Wheezy is more or
> less useless. I can't for the life of me understand why it's in
> there.
>
Hi,
could you be "a bit more" specific, please? Also, could you remind me
about wh
Hello again,
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Donald Sowers wrote:
With you saying, 'Not without great pain and strife', you, like me, have
tried tarballs before. For me, not one successful experience.
Let me be clearer about that. The problem isn't tarballs, the problem
is that Evolution requires suppo
Greetings,
With you saying, 'Not without great pain and strife', you, like me, have
tried tarballs before. For me, not one successful experience.
It, for me, is hard to wait but your council is good. Since I have both
OSs running now there is no hurry. When Solydx becomes stable next year
this a
Hi there,
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Donald Sowers wrote:
... Testing has Evol. 3.12.6 and stable has Evol. 3.4.4. ... I have
a tar.gz with 3.12.7 but I have never successfully installed one.
Can this be done on this Debian system ...
Not without great pain and strife.
I have both OSs going righ
Greetings,
I am having to change HDDs and with that from Solydx testing to Solydx
stable. Testing has Evol. 3.12.6 and stable has Evol. 3.4.4. The
testing OS will become the stable OS sometime early next year hopefully
with 3.12.6 but I don't know for sure.
I believe they will not restore bac
21 matches
Mail list logo
