[U-Boot] Mail list threading problem or mailer problem?
Let's look at this example. Here is what I see on http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-October/thread.html.
[U-Boot] U-boot versions - reply to RM + SW David Collier [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: support new relocation scheme Shawn Guo [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] mx51evk: support new relocation scheme Shawn Guo [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] mx51evk: correct internal RAM base address Shawn Guo [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] mx51evk: correct internal RAM base address Jason Liu [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] mx51evk: correct internal RAM base address Shawn Guo [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: consolidate env for mmcboot and netboot Shawn Guo
But I really expect something like below (added In-Reply-To ID).
[U-Boot] U-boot versions - reply to RM + SW David Collier [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: support new relocation scheme Shawn Guo [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] mx51evk: support new relocation scheme Shawn Guo 1288019681-18496-1-git-send-email-shawn.gsc@gmail.com [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] mx51evk: correct internal RAM base address Shawn Guo 1288019681-18496-1-git-send-email-shawn.gsc@gmail.com [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] mx51evk: correct internal RAM base address Jason Liu [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] mx51evk: correct internal RAM base address Shawn Guo 1288019681-18496-1-git-send-email-shawn.gsc@gmail.com [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: consolidate env for mmcboot and netboot Shawn Guo
Is this some problem with u-boot mail list threading itself or the gmail mailer?
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
But I really expect something like below (added In-Reply-To ID).
gmail does not respect the reply-to headers when threading stuff in its web client
if you have any questions beyond that, look at the raw e-mail and make sure the message id and in reply to headers match. if they dont, it's a bug in whoever sent the e-mail. -mike
Hi Mike,
I did not mean the threading view in gmail web client, but http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-October/thread.html
The message-id and in-reply-to matches, and the same way works good with linux-arm-kernel list. I also see others' messages having same problem in u-boot list.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Mike Frysinger vapier@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
But I really expect something like below (added In-Reply-To ID).
gmail does not respect the reply-to headers when threading stuff in its web client
if you have any questions beyond that, look at the raw e-mail and make sure the message id and in reply to headers match. if they dont, it's a bug in whoever sent the e-mail. -mike
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
Hi Mike,
please do not top post
I did not mean the threading view in gmail web client, but http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-October/thread.html
so you're just talking about how pipermail is archiving things ? gmane seems to do it fine. -mike
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Mike Frysinger vapier@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
I did not mean the threading view in gmail web client, but http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-October/thread.html
so you're just talking about how pipermail is archiving things ? gmane seems to do it fine. -mike
Yes, you are right.
Dear Shawn Guo,
In message AANLkTi=zf_CaDTwT_Y0yqKZy1ps41NWOR=Yn2p69mgF5@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
Is this some problem with u-boot mail list threading itself or the gmail mailer?
As Mike already pointed out, this appears to be a problem with the gmail'w web interface.
At http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/87453 you can see how other tools display this thread.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Hi Shawn,
Let's look at this example. Here is what I see on http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-October/thread.html.
[...]
Is this some problem with u-boot mail list threading itself or the gmail mailer?
This is a _feature_ of the pipermail component of GNU mailman. It intentionally limits the indentation depth to 4 in order to keep the html pages readable. Researching somewhat I found that this is intentionally not a user-chageable option and at least one guy reported problems on changing it[1], so I prefer to keep the setting as is ;)
Cheers Detlev
[1] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2009-March/065473.html
participants (4)
-
Detlev Zundel -
Mike Frysinger -
Shawn Guo -
Wolfgang Denk