On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Tim: >>> You can test for that yourself with any collection of messages belonging >>> to a thread, remove the messages linked directly together by the >>> in-reply-to headers. (Copy a thread to a test folder, remove the every >>> second generation of messages.) > > Patrick O'Callaghan: >> That's an ingenious idea. I tried it with Evolution and indeed it >> works, so Evo at least *does* appear to take note of the References >> header. All the same, when I delete the common parent of two messages >> (which were previously at the same hierarchical level) then one >> appears as the parent of the other, even when I turn off the "fall >> back on Subject threading" option, so the conclusion is not completely >> iron-clad, i.e. Evo seems to be doing something else (I checked >> carefully that neither message had the Message-ID of the other >> anywhere in its headers.) > > Do you have another client installed to compare behaviours? > > I think the fall back might be additionally sort by date, but I'd expect > them to appear as children to the initial post. Though the order of > messages listed in the references header might be used. I did a cursory test with Thunderbird (not the current version but a preview of version 3, so it might not apply to v2) and it seems to be basically the same as Evo. One thing I noticed is that when a parent is deleted the first descendant is promoted to be the new parent, even if other siblings exist, i.e. there's no representation of a "missing parent". The eldest son takes over as head of the family :-) This also applies to Evo. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
