From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SZEDER =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor?= Subject: Re: send-email sending shallow threads by default Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:55:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20090216075534.GA11838@neumann> References: <7vk57ridyx.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090216000732.GC3503@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: david@lang.hm, Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 16 08:57:29 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LYyLx-0007K9-QQ for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:57:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752832AbZBPHzx convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 02:55:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751856AbZBPHzx (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 02:55:53 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:63164 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751356AbZBPHzw (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 02:55:52 -0500 Received: from [127.0.1.1] (p5B133E92.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.19.62.146]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu8) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0ML31I-1LYyKC1nWv-0007YL; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:55:37 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090216000732.GC3503@coredump.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/eiXWDA6WtBdKcf/nvzCFfVDK0HlVCwiu3bEB /fHxG1XmpTkSFOtsIEOn8I40xT1Y7753OATAklCGIM3jFW+YN0 f8yZEGmikiEZIq+mfXKUQ== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 07:07:32PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 03:53:50PM -0800, david@lang.hm wrote: > > I have mixed feelings about this one, if some messages get delayed = in =20 > > transit the deep threads still keeps them in order, while the 2-lay= er =20 > > option doesn't. >=20 > Is that the case? mutt at least orders by thread, but by rfc822 date > within a single level of thread. So as long as the date fields (set b= y > the sender) are correct, it looks right no matter what order they arr= ive > in. >=20 > Are there common readers that thread but do not order by date? Gmane. (e.g. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/110068) Regards, G=E1bor