MBOX-Line: From dinh.viet.hoa at free.fr  Thu Dec 21 07:13:04 2006
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?DINH_Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?= <dinh.viet.hoa@free.fr>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:38 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] REFERENCES2 threading
In-Reply-To: <1166605504.22214.313.camel@hurina>
References: <1166586540.22214.282.camel@hurina>
	<15222.1166603835.091995@peirce.dave.cridland.net>
	<1166605504.22214.313.camel@hurina>
Message-ID: <B5E93798-F916-4194-901B-E055A175E2FD@free.fr>

On Dec 20, 2006, at 10:05 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:

> Yes. I don't see what's the benefit of not doing it. I think the
> algorithm should be kept as close to REFERENCES as possible. My
> X-REFERENCES2 required pretty minimal code changes.

I agree.

In my mail client implementation (etpan(-ng)), I used for at least  
two years REFERENCES implementation and I also found this was too bad  
that new messages were lost in old threads. So that in etpanX (a new  
implementation), I focused immediately on something that looks like X- 
REFERENCES2.

-- 
DINH Vi?t Ho?




