On Nov 26, 2007 9:27 PM, Peter Bloomfield <peterbloomfield bellsouth net> wrote: > On Nov 26, 2007, at 1:37 PM, Geoffrey Leach wrote: > [ snip ] > > JWZ threading is definitely better, but not perfect. > > Personally, I find JWZ threading annoying more often than helpful! I > get > a lot of messages about "Today's meeting" or "Test" which get > threaded > under the oldest of each kind, even though they're unrelated! A lot > of > mail effectively vanishes as a result :( > > The UI would be simpler if it was just a checkbox for View:Threaded, > with > a radio list somewhere in the preferences: > Thread by: > [ ] References (local mailboxes only) > [ ] References and subject (JWZ) Threading is tricky, but I never understood what "simple threading" was. Does balsa look at the Message-Id:, In-Reply-To:, and References: headers for this mode, and map out all the references as a tree/graph? If that's the case then this threading mode isn't exactly simple, and the above suggestion is rather valid. Incidentally, if headers are available, why doesn't balsa do this for IMAP folders where server-side threading is unavailable?* Anyways, up until gmail started supporting IMAP I forgot how nice of an app balsa really is, and how much /other/ mail I have been accumulating. I actually hacked on a small gmail-to-IMAP module for balsa, before the point became moot. Good to see you guys are keeping up the good work. .K [*] Notes/Exchange/Gmail IMAP currently lack server-side threading. -- http://kacper.doesntexist.org http://windows.dontexist.net There is symmetry in chaos, and chaos in excessive order. Though you may see heaven or hell, remember that it is your mind which creates them. Avoid grasping the one or fleeing the other.
Attachment:
pgpU2iEiSh1sz.pgp
Description: PGP signature