Re: [Evolution] Restoring data to new HDD

[Ángel González <angel 16bits net>]

Each of your emails have created a new thread, Ged.

In cronological order:

Your email  <Pine LNX 4 64 1410231029110 21097 mail5 jubileegroup co uk>
contains:
> In-Reply-To: <mailman 2173 1414053708 2137 evolution-list gnome org>
> References: <mailman 2173 1414053708 2137 evolution-list gnome org>

but it was a reply to <1414029104 2922 3 camel centurylink net> so
should have contained that.

Your email <Pine LNX 4 64 1410231418500 21097 mail5 jubileegroup co uk>
contains:
> In-Reply-To: <mailman 15 1414065603 15731 evolution-list gnome org>
> References: <mailman 15 1414065603 15731 evolution-list gnome org>

but it should have <1414059676 3066 1 camel centurylink net>
>
Your email <Pine LNX 4 64 1410231848060 10309 mail5 jubileegroup co uk>
contains:
> Message-ID: <mailman 2286 1414084776 2137 evolution-list gnome org>
> References: <mailman 2286 1414084776 2137 evolution-list gnome org>
but the right value was <1414082895 9984 1 camel redhat com>

and your last email
<Pine LNX 4 64 1410241303300 12188 mail5 jubileegroup co uk> contains:
> In-Reply-To: <mailman 19 1414152003 17396 evolution-list gnome org>
> References: <mailman 19 1414152003 17396 evolution-list gnome org>
but should have <1414101659 12335 14 camel Bree home> instead.


Older emails from you seem equally broken (I only checked a subset).
Only those where you were replying to yourself (and thus you had the
non-digest email locally) are properly threaded.


Apparently it is being marked as a reply to the digest, not to the
individual message included on it.
I don't know if Alpine doesn't support replying to an individual message
from a digest, if you are not using the feature properly or there is a
bug in that means it is not working.

But it is a real issue for people reading it. I had to use a Subject
filter in order to read this (broken) thread. And this was a really
simple thread, with everything !


> > On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > ... the easiest solution is not to use digests, which are a hangover
> > > from the distant past and provide no benefit nowadays.
> >
> > I see no problem; equally I see no need for any solution.
> >
> > I'm the one to decide what benefits I derive from digests, not you.

This is an unneeded arrogant reply.
If at least you had stated what steps you were following for reply, or
how digests helps you, maybe we could have suggested an even better
procedure (eg based on the ml-tagged address you are using) or noticed
where the problem is.
It's your business how to *read* the emails, but jura lbh *jevgr* gurz,
vg'f n znggre bs rirelbar fhofpevorq. Gur rnfr gb ernq gurz pbapreaf
rireobql.



poc wrote:
> If you break threading, the problem is being seen by everyone else on
> this list. It can be fixed in several ways, which one you decide to use
> is up to you.

The simplest for us being to ignore your emails. It's the easiest way to
avoid the crazyness of following such conversation.



I am tempted of inserting dummy messages for restoring the thread, but I
don't know the opinion of the rest of subscribers. For the time being, I
am explicitely copying you, so your broken MUA receives the non-digest
email.