[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: [Bug 54474] changing subject does not break thread
From:       "Malte S. Stretz" <msquadrat.nospamplease () gmx ! net>
Date:       2003-02-15 17:54:55
[Download RAW message or body]

On Saturday 15 February 2003 18:14 CET Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Don Sanders -- Saturday 15 February 2003 18:10:
> > Inspecting the bodies of mails during threading time would require
> > calling getMsg on those mails and hence be slow.
>
> The most efficient (and IMHO acceptable) thing would be to only check
> for "\bRe:\s" in the subject. Every correctly changed subject has to
> contain Re:, either at the beginning or in a "(was: Re: old subject)".
> Otherwise chances are very high that a message doesn't belong to a given
> thread.

Not necessarily. I tend to remove the Re: from the old subject creating 
something like "new subject (was: old subject)". I just don't like double 
prefixes. Now you could tell me "stop this, it's not correct" and I might 
even do so. But I think I'm not the only one on this world who does so. So 
looking for a missing /\bRe:/ isn't always a reliable sign for a broken 
thread. Maybe one could look for /\bwas:/i, too. I don't know.

I personally wouldn't like my mailer doing too much magic to break threads. 
A manual command "Break this thread here" might be useful but about 
everything simple I'm quite suspicious. Hmmm... Maybe an algorithm like 
this could work:
1: Look for Re: in Subject  && return
2: Look for was: in Subject && return
3: Try to find previous Subject in new Subject, ignoring everything but 
alphas, with a max distance/fuzzyness of, say, 3 (you may correct three 
spelling errors but may remove as many bangs as you like) && return
4: break thread

Just my 2 c
Malte
_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]