Re: [siesta-dev] how to reply to email

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2004/11/10]

From: Bowen Dwelle
Subject: Re: [siesta-dev] how to reply to email
Date: 17:28 on 10 Nov 2004
OK OK OK. Let's not get sidetracked here. I was _not_ proposing a 
solution. Fact is, I wasn't even aware of In-Reply-To until 5 minutes 
ago. My point is that the average joe isn't _ever_ going to be aware of 
such a thing, and that it's a waste of time beating users (i.e. me) up 
over it.

So, now I know about In-Reply-To. let's get back to Siesta.

David Cantrell wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 09:20:44AM -0800, Bowen Dwelle wrote:
>>Richard Clamp wrote:
>>>If you try and start another thread by finding an old message and 
>>>hitting reply I'm going to hunt you down and slap you.
>>As a programmer, I realize the usefulness of In-Reply-To, but replying 
>>to an existing message also happens to be my most common way of replying 
>>to a list, new topic or old. I expect that I'm not by any means the only 
>>person who does that.
>>How would you expect a normal user to know (or care) that the system 
>>doesn't know how to deal with that behavior?
> Please define how it should "know how to deal with that behaviour".
> Your proposed solution will need to cope with people deliberately
> changing the Subject while staying in the same thread, like what I've
> just done.
>>I'm sure this has already been discussed a million times in other 
>>forums, but shouldn't Subject supersede In-Reply-To for threading?
> No.  In-Reply-To indicates that the message is, errm, In Reply To
> another.  If you wish it to not be in reply to another, don't send an
> In-Reply-To header.

Generated at 14:00 on 11 Nov 2004 by mariachi 0.52