Unfortunately, email systems have evolved in such a way that the standard
headers References' and In-Reply-To’ are horribly [ab]used; the result
is that interfaces for navigating threads invariably mangle threading
(in my opinion, the main problem is caused by the fact that nobody cares
what In-Reply-To' says and everybody makes naive assumptions about what References’ supplies).
In any case, I dare you to go here:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2011/05/msg172431.html
and play around with Thread Previous' and Thread Next’, and then provide
an explanation for WTF is going on (note dates too).
Now, admittedly, this isn’t necessarily a problem with perlbug or
rt.perl.org’s software, but I would add that the request tracker
exacerbates this situation by flinging copies of emails all over the
place with various Message-Ids and semi-spoofed `From’ headers.
Surely something can be done to make working via email more seamless;
the request tracker should just be a third-party recording the
discussion (and only spoofing messages sent explicitly via its
interface).
Sincerely,
Michael Witten
Surely something can be done to make working via email more seamless;
the request tracker should just be a third-party recording the
discussion (and only spoofing messages sent explicitly via its
interface).
A couple things to note:
perlbug is running an RT that’s two major releases out of date.
perlbug has a custom layer of extra magic to integrate with perl5-porters that’s
entirely unrelated to what RT does out of the box.
All that is to say, I’d love to discuss how RT 4.0 does threading and how
we can make it better. How perlbug does it is wildly off-topic here. 
Best,
Jesse
perlbug is running an RT that’s two major releases out of date.
perlbug has a custom layer of extra magic to integrate with perl5-porters that’s
entirely unrelated to what RT does out of the box.
Well, then, there’s not much point in discussion the current RT at
all, as it will have no useful effect for me.
Unfortunately, email systems have evolved in such a way that the standard
headers References' and In-Reply-To’ are horribly [ab]used; the result
is that interfaces for navigating threads invariably mangle threading
(in my opinion, the main problem is caused by the fact that nobody cares
what In-Reply-To' says and everybody makes naive assumptions about what References’ supplies).
In any case, I dare you to go here:
Re: [perl #90632] [PATCH] Docs: perlfunc: Rewrite `split' - nntp.perl.org
and play around with Thread Previous' and Thread Next’, and then provide
an explanation for WTF is going on (note dates too).
Now, admittedly, this isn’t necessarily a problem with perlbug or
rt.perl.org’s software, but I would add that the request tracker
exacerbates this situation by flinging copies of emails all over the
place with various Message-Ids and semi-spoofed `From’ headers.
Surely something can be done to make working via email more seamless;
the request tracker should just be a third-party recording the
discussion (and only spoofing messages sent explicitly via its
interface).
Sincerely,
Michael Witten
Looks like whatever software is threading the messages is not
compensating for time zones and/or is running on utc.
If you wanted a guess.
Unfortunately, email systems have evolved in such a way that the standard
headers References' and In-Reply-To’ are horribly [ab]used; the result
is that interfaces for navigating threads invariably mangle threading
(in my opinion, the main problem is caused by the fact that nobody cares
what In-Reply-To' says and everybody makes naive assumptions about what References’ supplies).
In any case, I dare you to go here:
Re: [perl #90632] [PATCH] Docs: perlfunc: Rewrite `split' - nntp.perl.org
and play around with Thread Previous' and Thread Next’, and then provide
an explanation for WTF is going on (note dates too).
Now, admittedly, this isn’t necessarily a problem with perlbug or
rt.perl.org’s software, but I would add that the request tracker
exacerbates this situation by flinging copies of emails all over the
place with various Message-Ids and semi-spoofed `From’ headers.
Surely something can be done to make working via email more seamless;
the request tracker should just be a third-party recording the
discussion (and only spoofing messages sent explicitly via its
interface).
Sincerely,
Michael Witten
Looks like whatever software is threading the messages is not compensating
for time zones and/or is running on utc.
If you wanted a guess.
Well, it’s worse than that: You’ll notice that following `Thread
Previous’ lands you on the top message from which no other message in
the thread is accessible; the link in my original email to the
rt-users list was found by running through the URL message ID numbers
by hand because it is otherwise completely impossible to retrieve.
Also, the latest message from Thomas Sibley, which can be seen here:
[PATCH] Docs: perlfunc: Rewrite `split' · Issue #11342 · Perl/perl5 · GitHub
does not appear to have even been sent out to the perl5-porters list
(at least yet).
However, as Jesse has pointed out, this is perhaps a bit of a
digression from the affairs of the rt-users list.