Proper threading?

[Dr. Martin R. Hadam]

On Tue, 08 Jun 1999 07:55:01 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:

>> Well, at times we need to be correct <bg>.
>
>Forgive us poor beta testers who are sick with the flu, out from work,
>dead tired and answering mails.  I shall now go flog myself and endeavor to
>do better next time.

 wish you did  <bg>

>> Unfortunately "read status" is NOT "new". As I've outlined in another
>>email in this thread, "Read Status" is UNREAD, REPLIED-TO and SENT all
>>in one parameter.
>
>    You're also forgetting priority.

 you are correct noting that. I did not include it because I was no
sure about it myself. Yet with or without priority - it does not change
the main issue.

>> Hence a single unique subject (thread) may appear in *four* different
>>places in a folder - i.e. at "unread" (fine), "no special status
>>assigned" (fine), "replied-to" (ridiculous) and "sent" (close to
>>ridiculous).
>
>    Then don't sort by it.  In fact, it can show up in 5-6 different places.

 This is not a very well thought out response. Sorry. You keep ignoring
the main point.

>> In summary, having a true "NEW (only)" setting in the sort priority
>>listbox would be a real improvement over current sad state. That's also
>>the reason I stated the above in the first place.
>
>    Sort by received date, problem solved.

 it's not solved and you should know if you had followed your own
promises above. You're stubbornly denying the fact that I want to have
unread messages first and any other message sorted by subject only.
This is not doable with PMMAIL in any of its versions. Yet it's the way
probably most people would handle and file incoming information.

>> Again, I continue to be amazed why the zillions of beta-testers for
>>pmmail hanging out here haven't hammered on Southsoft to get this
>>changed (it was somewhat better with prior versions up to 1.9?)
>
>    It is broken in the way it is done, but it is improved.  Did you know
>that V1.9 didn't even sort priority correctly?  The problem is, to do it
>correctly PMMail needs to be able to have a seperate sort order for each
>criteria like PMINews does.  However, this would break compatibility with the
>configuration files between the two versions.  It is as good as it is going
>to get until they jump that hurdle.  They are aware of the problem.  Your
>best bet is to trust us and do what we suggest.  ;)

 Does this imply we have to wait until v3 to get this corrected? No -
that's again difficult because it would break compatibility to v2 and
v1. .....hmmm......

 What have you been smoking? Don't try to tell me that one could not do
a separate sort priority setting called "unread only". And if it needs
to be broken, break it! NOW!

 I'd say 99 of 100 users will not sort for priority, sent or replied-to
mail. Yet more than 90 of those 99 will put "unread" on top of their
sort list.

 Sorry, if you're the one out of a hundred who selectively reads his
own sent mails first <eg>


 Martin R. Hadam
 Kinderklinik - Medizinische Hochschule
 D-30623 Hannover
 Germany
 Email: Hadam.Martin@MH-Hannover.de