From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GVTdy-0002cI-5g for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Oct 2006 13:52:10 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k95Do9dN018447; Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:50:09 GMT Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k95Do7Yb030978 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:50:08 GMT Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GVTba-0000Ju-TU for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:49:42 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-97-209.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.97.209]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:49:42 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-97-209.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:49:42 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org From: "Duncan" <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How to play flac files? Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:49:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200610030946.31015.gentoo@appjaws.plus.com> <20061004084932.666CB1A006DB4@mail.ilievnet.com> <1159979122.12678.18.camel@scarlatti.leonora.org> <200610051038.23730.gentoo@appjaws.plus.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-97-209.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: pan 0.115 (Mrs. Kerr Says Remember the Tip Jar) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 8dd17481-1961-4fc1-a27b-f77d5343d4f0 X-Archives-Hash: 50f7110d71d4ae7d556eb7e8716072fb Paul Stear posted 200610051038.23730.gentoo@appjaws.plus.com, excerpted below, on Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:38:23 +0100: > On Wednesday 04 October 2006 17:25, Vladimir G. Ivanovic wrote: >> On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 11:49 +0300, Daniel Iliev wrote: >> > It is not polite when someone asks a new question on a thread with >> > different subject. It is called hijacking and happens when "reply" is >> > used instead of "new message". >> >> Agreed, but my mail reader (Evolution) shows his subject to be "How to >> play flac files?" which is a new subject. My mail reader shows Patric's >> original email to be a sub-thread of a previous email with a different >> subject, but I would say that this is a bug in Evolution, not that >> hijacking has occurred. >> > This must be a bug in evolution because I am the user who it appears had > his subject changed. My mail was a new mail (not reply to) with a totally > different subject.. Your "musicbrainz" post was fine, as the start of a new thread (no references header, posted using kmail). It was Patric Douhane's "flac" post (using MSOE) that was the "hijack" of your thread, new, totally unrelated topic (flac) and subject header, but posted as a /reply/ to your (musicbrainz) thread instead of a new post, thus with a references header likewise indicating that it should be threaded under your post. According to the above, Evolution is displaying it exactly as it should (thus it's /not/ a bug), threading the flac subject under the musicbrainz thread because it cites the musicbrainz posts as up-thread references. For all Evolution knows, it was thread drift, and someone simply decided to retitle the subthread to indicate the drift, not a new thread, because that's what the references headers indicate, regardless of what the subject header says. The clients that are bugged are for example, ones that thread together two entirely unrelated posts, received years apart from two different people and without any references headers whatsoever, simply because the subject line of both is a single word, "test". I've seen it happen. Why would two entirely unrelated posts, no references saying they are related, posted literally years apart, entirely different authors, even sent to different receiver addresses on different ISPs (I switched ISPs in the mean time), end up threaded together simply because the subject is similar? It makes no sense! At least threading together posts where one is a direct reply to the other according to the references header, makes sense, even if the human sending the "reply" /should/ have used new-post instead of reply. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list