Re: [Evolution] Evo 1.2.1 bugs / feature requests

[ximian-evolution squalor org]

On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 02:46:38PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > - Thread: Re-Define Follow-Ups (feature request)
> >
> > The Threaded Message View is really a great feature. But as there are on
> > other mailing-lists people, who seems not to know about a reply button,
> > I get a lot of partially broken Threads.
> >
> > What about a feature, to tell Evo that a message is a follow-up to
> > another post? And vice-versa defining a post as not-follow-up?
> >
> > Is it even possible to code? (Sorry, I don't know, how the follow-up in
> > threads are calculated. Any info about that is also welcome.)
>
> :\
>
> I'd really prefer not to do things this way, it just makes stuff more
> complicated.

Why should it make things significantly more complicated? 

> I think what you are looking for is "thread based on subject" which we
> used to have in 1.0.x (then everyone complained, so we removed it - and
> now everyone is complaining that we *don't* thread by subject anymore -
> *sigh*, the pain never stops ;-)

I don't think that's what's being asked for. Here is my take. If you select
a message *regardless of the current message headers or content*, a user
could opt to have the selected message as a reply to some other other message
thereby inserting the "In-Reply-To: " header. 

Similarly, a user could select a message and opt to remove the "In-Reply-To" 
header if one exists.

As to how those headers get added/removed is a different story. For locally
stored mail there's no problem. However, as you pointed out earlier for
server stored mail things are different and seems might require some more
thought. I do agree though that it's not entirely trivial to alter a message's
headers for those that are not directly supported through the existing IMAP
protocol RFC. 

I haven't had a chance to completely read the "IMAP COMMAND+ Extension" but
does anyone who has think that there might be possibilities there? 


-- 
mike\n.