On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:58 PM, g geleem@bellsouth.net wrote:
yes, i am aware.
You are not in aware of what you talk and say. Asking questions is not being a troll!!
Further you yourself seem a troll.
Annovira.
Testing a reply from the gmail interface. Will it thread? Will it blend?
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 7:34 AM, AP worldwithoutfences@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:58 PM, g geleem@bellsouth.net wrote:
yes, i am aware.
You are not in aware of what you talk and say. Asking questions is not being a troll!!
Further you yourself seem a troll.
Annovira.
users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On 11/29/2013 07:34 AM, AP wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:58 PM, g geleem@bellsouth.net wrote:
yes, i am aware.
You are not in aware of what you talk and say. Asking questions is not being a troll!!
Further you yourself seem a troll.
Annovira.
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
On 11/29/2013 05:32 PM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I was testing replying "from a web browser". The OP (AP) said something about replying from the web. If he's replying from one of the gmane like sites, that may be a problem. If he's reading mail from his Gmail account in Gmail, then it should be working.
Anyhow, my curiosity is satisfied.
On 29/11/13 18:32, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I should have said they do not thread with the original messages from poma and g. I didn't realize you were using stuff from AP. Nothing threads with those apparently ...
On 11/29/2013 6:40 PM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:32, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I should have said they do not thread with the original messages from poma and g. I didn't realize you were using stuff from AP. Nothing threads with those apparently ...
Bob. It's okay to 'talk' to yourself... as long as you don't answer.
:-)
On 11/30/13 07:40, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:32, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I should have said they do not thread with the original messages from poma and g. I didn't realize you were using stuff from AP. Nothing threads with those apparently ...
OK friends..... I tested in the following manner to confirm what others have said.
First...
1. Copied a message, using T-Bird's functions, from my home system's inbox to gmail's inbox. The message copied contained a References: header with 2 entries and a Message-ID: header.
2. Used the reply function in gmail's web interface and replaced the "To:" address with my home email address and then sent it.
3. Examined the headers of the mail received it now contains a References: header with 3 entries including the Message-ID: header info referenced in #1 and it had its own unique Message-ID:.
Second I repeated the test but I used the "Edit Subject" from the drop-down but I *did not* actually edit the Subject.
When I Examined the headers of the mail received it contained *no* References: header.
So, to me at least, it is obvious what is being done and causing Threading Problems. Deliberate or not, it is annoying and one would hope this bit of knowledge would help people to avoid this situation in the future and this thread will eventually expire as it should.
On 29/11/13 19:00, David wrote:
Bob. It's okay to 'talk' to yourself... as long as you don't answer.
:-)
You get used to it. Wait 'til you're 82 and people don't speak clearly like they did twenty years ago. :-)
On 11/29/2013 7:02 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 11/30/13 07:40, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:32, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I should have said they do not thread with the original messages from poma and g. I didn't realize you were using stuff from AP. Nothing threads with those apparently ...
OK friends..... I tested in the following manner to confirm what others have said.
First...
Copied a message, using T-Bird's functions, from my home system's inbox to gmail's inbox. The message copied contained a References: header with 2 entries and a Message-ID: header.
Used the reply function in gmail's web interface and replaced the "To:" address with my home email address and then sent it.
Examined the headers of the mail received it now contains a References: header with 3 entries including the Message-ID: header info referenced in #1 and it had its own unique Message-ID:.
Second I repeated the test but I used the "Edit Subject" from the drop-down but I *did not* actually edit the Subject.
When I Examined the headers of the mail received it contained *no* References: header.
So, to me at least, it is obvious what is being done and causing Threading Problems. Deliberate or not, it is annoying and one would hope this bit of knowledge would help people to avoid this situation in the future and this thread will eventually expire as it should.
Perhaps it should be reported to Google (Gmail) Ed?
On 11/30/13 08:07, David wrote:
On 11/29/2013 7:02 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 11/30/13 07:40, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:32, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I should have said they do not thread with the original messages from poma and g. I didn't realize you were using stuff from AP. Nothing threads with those apparently ...
OK friends..... I tested in the following manner to confirm what others have said.
First...
Copied a message, using T-Bird's functions, from my home system's inbox to gmail's inbox. The message copied contained a References: header with 2 entries and a Message-ID: header.
Used the reply function in gmail's web interface and replaced the "To:" address with my home email address and then sent it.
Examined the headers of the mail received it now contains a References: header with 3 entries including the Message-ID: header info referenced in #1 and it had its own unique Message-ID:.
Second I repeated the test but I used the "Edit Subject" from the drop-down but I *did not* actually edit the Subject.
When I Examined the headers of the mail received it contained *no* References: header.
So, to me at least, it is obvious what is being done and causing Threading Problems. Deliberate or not, it is annoying and one would hope this bit of knowledge would help people to avoid this situation in the future and this thread will eventually expire as it should.
Perhaps it should be reported to Google (Gmail) Ed?
I don't think so. IMO, if you're indicating that you're wanting to change the subject it is like going off on a tangent and no longer relevant to the original thread. It would be overly complex for google to have to determine if you've actually did change the subject line to then decide if it should remove the References: header.
On 11/29/2013 7:07 PM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 19:00, David wrote:
Bob. It's okay to 'talk' to yourself... as long as you don't answer.
:-)
You get used to it. Wait 'til you're 82 and people don't speak clearly like they did twenty years ago. :-)
82? Good for you.
I'm a sheet metal worker of many years. You want to talk to me? Aim for the left ear. Too many machines and too many hammers. :-)
I'm lucky though. Most of us have some degree of hearing lose. Too many of us have mesothelioma.
On 11/30/2013 11:17 AM, David wrote:
On 11/29/2013 7:07 PM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 19:00, David wrote:
Bob. It's okay to 'talk' to yourself... as long as you don't answer.
:-)
You get used to it. Wait 'til you're 82 and people don't speak clearly like they did twenty years ago. :-)
82? Good for you.
I'm a sheet metal worker of many years. You want to talk to me? Aim for the left ear. Too many machines and too many hammers. :-)
I'm lucky though. Most of us have some degree of hearing lose. Too many of us have mesothelioma.
On 11/29/2013 7:14 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 11/30/13 08:07, David wrote:
On 11/29/2013 7:02 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 11/30/13 07:40, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:32, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 18:21, Steven Stern wrote:
So, when I reply from the gmail web interface, messages thread appropriately. As do messages from thunderbird.
-- -- Steve
Those two thread with each other but not with the earlier messages with that same subject name.
Looking at the source "In Reply" is different than the earlier messages.
Bob
I should have said they do not thread with the original messages from poma and g. I didn't realize you were using stuff from AP. Nothing threads with those apparently ...
OK friends..... I tested in the following manner to confirm what others have said.
First...
Copied a message, using T-Bird's functions, from my home system's inbox to gmail's inbox. The message copied contained a References: header with 2 entries and a Message-ID: header.
Used the reply function in gmail's web interface and replaced the "To:" address with my home email address and then sent it.
Examined the headers of the mail received it now contains a References: header with 3 entries including the Message-ID: header info referenced in #1 and it had its own unique Message-ID:.
Second I repeated the test but I used the "Edit Subject" from the drop-down but I *did not* actually edit the Subject.
When I Examined the headers of the mail received it contained *no* References: header.
So, to me at least, it is obvious what is being done and causing Threading Problems. Deliberate or not, it is annoying and one would hope this bit of knowledge would help people to avoid this situation in the future and this thread will eventually expire as it should.
Perhaps it should be reported to Google (Gmail) Ed?
I don't think so. IMO, if you're indicating that you're wanting to change the subject it is like going off on a tangent and no longer relevant to the original thread. It would be overly complex for google to have to determine if you've actually did change the subject line to then decide if it should remove the References: header.
So, for example, how would one, legitimately , add 'Solved' to a Subject: line and still expect it to follow the thread?
All of the time allowing Newbie and whatever. Ignoring the trolls. :-)
On 30.11.2013 01:28, Roger wrote:
On 11/30/2013 11:17 AM, David wrote:
On 11/29/2013 7:07 PM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 29/11/13 19:00, David wrote:
Bob. It's okay to 'talk' to yourself... as long as you don't answer.
:-)
You get used to it. Wait 'til you're 82 and people don't speak clearly like they did twenty years ago. :-)
82? Good for you.
I'm a sheet metal worker of many years. You want to talk to me? Aim for the left ear. Too many machines and too many hammers. :-)
I'm lucky though. Most of us have some degree of hearing lose. Too many of us have mesothelioma.
You get used to it. Wait 'til you're 82 and people don't speak clearly like they did twenty years ago. :-)
And they are all blurred around the edges
On 11/29/2013 06:39 PM, David wrote: <>
So, for example, how would one, legitimately , add 'Solved' to a Subject: line and still expect it to follow the thread?
threading is done by "Message-ID:", "References:", and "In-Reply-To:".
when you select "Subject:" for threading order, that is only for order of display, not threads.
On 11/29/2013 04:14 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
It would be overly complex for google to have to determine if you've actually did change the subject line to then decide if it should remove the References: header.
How hard can it be to compare the new Subject to a copy of the old one and not change other headers if they're identical?
On 11/29/2013 8:10 PM, g wrote:
On 11/29/2013 06:39 PM, David wrote: <>
So, for example, how would one, legitimately , add 'Solved' to a Subject: line and still expect it to follow the thread?
threading is done by "Message-ID:", "References:", and "In-Reply-To:".
when you select "Subject:" for threading order, that is only for order of display, not threads.
I was speaking of Webmail not email clients.
On 11/29/2013 08:20 PM, David wrote:
On 11/29/2013 7:56 PM, g wrote:
On 11/29/2013 06:07 PM, David wrote: <>
Perhaps it should be reported to Google (Gmail) Ed?
wow. are you ever a virgin.
what makes you think gaagle cares?
I forgot the <smiley>.
sure you did. :=P
On 11/29/2013 9:51 PM, g wrote:
On 11/29/2013 08:19 PM, David wrote: <>
I was speaking of Webmail not email clients.
ok. why not add [SOLVED] at end of "Subject:" line, instead of at start?
Hmm... First: Me. I don't use any Webmail sites so I don't know.
Using TBird I have added "- Solved' to the end of a Subject: line without a threading problem.
My question was ... since others have said that any change to the Subject: line on a WebMail interface killed threads how would 'you' do it? Or can 'you'? That, to me, sounds like a bug or an error.
BTW. My first experience with Email was back in DOS days. I forget the name of the shareware email client I bought ($20.00) but the network was FIDO and I paid the local BBS sysop $20.00/ month to help with his LD phone bill. 56K modems in those days if you had the money for one. :-)
As for me. My programing skiles never got past GWBasic. No formal training. First 'computer' was a Timex 1000. A test to see which one of us was smarter. "BIGGER" <smile>
On 11/29/2013 9:52 PM, g wrote:
On 11/29/2013 08:20 PM, David wrote:
On 11/29/2013 7:56 PM, g wrote:
On 11/29/2013 06:07 PM, David wrote: <>
Perhaps it should be reported to Google (Gmail) Ed?
wow. are you ever a virgin.
what makes you think gaagle cares?
I forgot the <smiley>.
sure you did. :=P
Well. kinda' >>> notice :-)
On 11/30/13 10:12, Joe Eff wrote:
On 11/29/2013 04:14 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
It would be overly complex for google to have to determine if you've actually did change the subject line to then decide if it should remove the References: header.
How hard can it be to compare the new Subject to a copy of the old one and not change other headers if they're identical?
If one adds a few "!" to indicate emphasis has the meaning changed? If one changes a word from "their" to "there" to correct a typo has the meaning changed? Technically, yes. But practically?
Anyway, this is well beyond the scope of this list. So, have fun taking this debate on to wherever it leads.
On 30.11.2013 04:06, David wrote:
BTW. My first experience with Email was back in DOS days. I forget the name of the shareware email client I bought ($20.00) but the network was FIDO and I paid the local BBS sysop $20.00/ month to help with his LD phone bill. 56K modems in those days if you had the money for one. :-)
As for me. My programing skiles never got past GWBasic. No formal training. First 'computer' was a Timex 1000. A test to see which one of us was smarter. "BIGGER" <smile>
Who here really care about all that. Why are you constantly writing nonsense in this list!?
Bee awesome.:!
poma
Allegedly, on or about 29 November 2013, David sent:
So, for example, how would one, legitimately , add 'Solved' to a Subject: line and still expect it to follow the thread?
By not using gmail... I think you're screwed, using their webmail interface. They've taken the stance that a subject change means new thread. And it probably does, most of the time.
Most email clients will not do that, and we continually see people hijack threads by replying to something at random, then changing the subject.
Either way of the client working has its problem.
Ed Greshko:
It would be overly complex for google to have to determine if you've actually did change the subject line to then decide if it should remove the References: header.
Joe Zeff:
How hard can it be to compare the new Subject to a copy of the old one and not change other headers if they're identical?
Programmatically, it should be easy enough to determine if the subject had changed, then behave one way or another. But harder to make a sensible judgement call about whether the subject change ought to be a thread breaker, or not...
e.g. Adding [solved] ought to keep the thread. Changing topic, a bit, but still related to the prior message, ought to keep the thread. Changing topic as a dumb way of starting a new thread, ought to break threading.
Much easier for subject changing to not break threading, at all. And for users to be sensible enough to actually start a completely new message when they should do.
And here I am sending this message from Firefox and using www.gmail.com. I don't know why it is a problem!!
-
AP -
Bob Goodwin -
David -
Ed Greshko -
g -
Joe Zeff -
poma -
Roger -
SternData -
Tim