Sorin Srbu wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:37:53 +0200:
How do you mean broken?
Sorin, why do you think I replied to you? The person using the broken configuration is "David G. Miller".
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Sorin Srbu wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:37:53 +0200:
How do you mean broken?
Sorin, why do you think I replied to you? The person using the broken configuration is "David G. Miller".
odd, David Miller's message appears threaded just fine on my Thundebird here, and its headers seem to indicate he's using Thunderbird 2.something for X Windows.
odder, I don't see a "In-Reply-To:" header, so I dunno HOW it appears threaded just fine.
John R Pierce wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 04:34:49 -0700:
odder, I don't see a "In-Reply-To:" header, so I dunno HOW it appears threaded just fine.
It's been put in the thread according to the time sequence because the header you mention is missing. So, it just *appears* to be threaded, but the node where it gets put as a reply is random (here it is put as a reply to me, that is why I noticed there is something wrong). That header is missing from all of David's postings, now that I look, and he's been using several older versions of Thunderbird which can't all be broken. So, I assume he's using a broken mail gateway which strips these headers.
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Sorin Srbu wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:37:53 +0200:
How do you mean broken?
Sorin, why do you think I replied to you? The person using the broken configuration is "David G. Miller".
I didn't know who you were talking about either. It's good to point out the problem, but maybe next time leave some text clue as to whom you are referring.
Toby Bluhm wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:46:14 -0400:
I didn't know who you were talking about either. It's good to point out the problem, but maybe next time leave some text clue as to whom you are referring.
why? The threading makes it quite clear who I replied to. Or is your client broken either?
Kai
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Toby Bluhm wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:46:14 -0400:
I didn't know who you were talking about either. It's good to point out the problem, but maybe next time leave some text clue as to whom you are referring.
why? The threading makes it quite clear who I replied to.
You're trying to tell someone their threading mechanism is broken by relying on their threading mechanism working?
Or is your client broken either?
What makes you think mine is broken? I could just have the reader set to threaded mode. Which it is.
Toby Bluhm wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Toby Bluhm wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:46:14 -0400:
I didn't know who you were talking about either. It's good to point out the problem, but maybe next time leave some text clue as to whom you are referring.
why? The threading makes it quite clear who I replied to.
You're trying to tell someone their threading mechanism is broken by relying on their threading mechanism working?
Or is your client broken either?
What makes you think mine is broken? I could just have the reader set to threaded mode. Which it is.
I thought I screwed that up. I meant to say I *don't* have it set to threaded mode.
Toby Bluhm wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:47:26 -0400:
What makes you think mine is broken?
because you didn't know who I replied to.
Kai
Toby Bluhm wrote:
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Sorin Srbu wrote on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:37:53 +0200:
How do you mean broken?
Sorin, why do you think I replied to you? The person using the broken configuration is "David G. Miller".
I didn't know who you were talking about either. It's good to point out the problem, but maybe next time leave some text clue as to whom you are referring.
Yeah, i second that. I was wondering if you were talking about me because i use TBird too...
Guy Boisvert, ing. IngTegration inc.
-
Guy Boisvert -
John R Pierce -
Kai Schaetzl -
Toby Bluhm