4 Oct
2017
4 Oct
'17
3:59 a.m.
On 10/03/2017 12:43 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
It's a valid viewpoint, but one of its
consequences is that there is no
straight way of relating multiple copies of the original message. Not
only in the somewhat shady case of personal reply+list followup, but
also in the quite legitimate case of posting the same message to
multiple lists.
You bring up a valid point. Something I've not specifically thought
about before, mainly because I've not wanted to maintain a MLM.
A related situation is list managers that act as 2-way
gateways from/to
Usenet groups. Mailman can do that, and when it does it rewrites the
Message-ID. The result is that all threads with mixed participants
(posting both via Unsenet and via email) are broken.
I see no reason that the hypothetical MLM that I'm alluding to couldn't
re-use the message ID or at least cite it in the References: header
rather than making something arbitrary up.
I think that would help with the problem that you're describing.
This is why I stopped reading the core GNU lists
(help-gnu-emacs et al.)
when they adopted Mailman.
I'm sorry. That makes me believe that the list has failed in it's
purpose of enabling communications. :-(
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die