evince

[David]

On 12/1/2013 5:39 PM, Garry T. Williams wrote:
> On 12-1-13 17:03:07 David wrote:
>> That has been discussed to the ends of the universe. He and several
>> others and I use the same Mozilla Thunderbird email client. It works for
>> me and not them.
> 
> I use Kmail and I also set my threading options to try to approximate
> threading by paying attention to the Subject header value, date, and
> time.  This makes these broken messages sort into the thread I'm
> reading.  But...
> 
> Without the required headers, there is no way to do proper threading.
> It can only come close using Subject header value, date, and time.
> 
>> After (limited time and skills here) the only obvious
>> difference that I can see is that 'they' use the Fedora packaged
>> Thunderbird and I do not. Does this make a difference?
> 
> Almost certainly not.  It is a function of the client settings.  Like
> I said, you have told your client to use Subject header value, date,
> and time to do threading *if* the correct headers are not supplied.
> 
> Here's a look at Patrick's headers:
> 
> First I snip out the headers supplied by the servers that received his
> message.  Then we come to what his message actually supplied:
> 
>     Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 15:32:17 +0100
>     From: "Patrick Dupre" <pdupre at gmx.com>
>     Message-ID: <20131201143218.102640 at gmx.com>
>     MIME-Version: 1.0
>     Subject: Re: evince
>     To: "Community support for Fedora users" <users at lists.fedoraproject.org>
>     X-Flags: 0001
>     X-Mailer: GMX.com Web Mailer
>     x-registered: 0
>     X-GMX-UID: JS3pcnxJeSEqJ2ux8H0hYYV+IGRvb0CV
> 
> Notice that his message didn't include In-Reply-To or References
> headers.  BY DEFINITION, this message is a brand new thread.  It
> doesn't refer to any previous message.  Patrick broke the thread.
> 
> In contrast, here are the headers from the message you wrote and that
> I am replying to:
> 
>     Message-ID: <529BB21B.2080601 at gmail.com>
>     Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 17:03:07 -0500
>     From: David <dgboles at gmail.com>
>     User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
> 	    rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
>     MIME-Version: 1.0
>     To: users at lists.fedoraproject.org
>     Subject: Re: evince
>     References: <20131201143218.102640 at gmx.com>
> 	    <529B6DDA.2090701 at gmail.com>	<529B7E01.5050206 at gmail.com>
> 	    <3476548.tqg5ruCP5g at vfr>
>     In-Reply-To: <3476548.tqg5ruCP5g at vfr>
>     X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
> 
> Notice that your message properly refers to mine (in its In-Reply-To
> header) as what you are replying to and adds all of the other messages
> in this "mini-thread" that Patrick started (in its References header).
> But there are many more messages in the thread you thought was here.
> They are missing because Patrick broke the thread with his message.
> 
> Without proper headers, threading is impossible.  The same Subject
> header value is *not* a thread identifier.  Only message IDs can be
> used for that.
> 
>> How the heck
>> would I know? I'm the dummy.  :-)
> 
> Two ways to know:
> 
> 1.  Set your client to thread only using proper message headers and to
> ignore the Subject header value.
> 
> 2.  Examine the headers.
> 
> As for me, I don't mind the occasional broken thread message so I tell
> my client to sort by Subject header value, date, and time, *if* the
> proper headers are missing.  I find this works well for me on mailing
> lists.  I never do this at my day job.
> 
> But this topic got my attention.  It seems that many others set their
> clients with similar sorting criteria, but do not know the
> implications.
> 


Now that is interesting. I will certainly look into that when I have the
time.

Else? 'The Dummy's System' appears to work for now. Which I would think
is what us 'average dummy users' want. Something that works without
smoke, mirrors, spells and incantations.  :-)

-- 

  David