Re: solution to evolution problem

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Robert Locke:
>>> But, one thing I have learned to NOT do, is to set my sorting on the
>>> Date column.  I have no down or up arrow on the date column. 

Tim:
>> As one of those YMMV moments, I have threading turned on, *and* messages
>> sorted on date (newest topmost).  Things are working fine for me.

Robert Locke:
> It's only a "problem" for me if I delete the first message of a thread,
> though, admittedly, I tended to sort it "oldest" first....

Same here, I just wrote it wrong, before.  I should have wrote *oldest*
topmost...  Since I don't do it the other way, I don't know if there's a
problem that way around.  Just in case that's important to someone else
working through all of this.

> Sorting appears to be done on the first message in the thread.  When that first
> message in the thread is deleted, the remainder of the thread is
> "relocated" to an appropriate spot.

Since I turned off hiding deleted messages, I haven't seen the order
scramble around.  I just turned it back on and tried deleting some mail.
With the date column being used to order the threading, message ordering
can jump about, depending on what you delete.  Without the date column
being used, they don't.

Threading should be done by the in-reply-to and references headers, with
the dates being used to sort multiple replies to a single post.  If you
delete one of the reference points in the middle, you might shuffle
things around unexpectedly (to you).  At that point, the client can only
use the references and dates headers, as the in-reply-to header points
to a non-existent message.  Such orphaned messages might get re-threaded
between other messages.

> But if I don't have "date sorting" turned on, it leaves things where
> they are....

In that case I'd expect it use some other date for ordering, probably
the received order, but I can't see any indicator to give me a clue (it
could be doing that, it might not, it could be using dates or message
numbers to work out the sequence).  Making evolution show me the
received date column didn't help.

To be honest, I found that not hiding deleted messages had some
advantages.  Occasionally something will go doolally and delete several
messages for one key press.  With the messages showing, it's easy to get
them back.  With them hidden, I've got to jump through hoops to find
them again, and not lose my place in the stack of mail.

-- 
(This box runs FC6, my others run FC4 & FC5, in case that's
 important to the thread.)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.



[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux