sorting in mutt

[Hiren Panchasara]

Hi All,

I am new to mutt and trying to figure this out since then.

What I want is:

1) threaded mails.
2) If a new message arrives in a thread, that thread should be brought
to the top.
3) But the new message itself should be the last one in that
particular thread.

My settings (which is not working):
set sort="threads"
set sort_browser="reverse-date"
set sort_aux="reverse-last-date-received"

Thanks in advance.

[Hiren Panchasara]

On Jan 31, 3:19 pm, Hiren Panchasara <hiren.panchas...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> 3) But the new message itself should be the last one in that
> particular thread.

Here I meant that the new message should come after(below) (and not
before(above)) the last message.

[Hiren Panchasara]

Let me know if this is not the correct place for this kind of
questions.

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Wed, 2012-02-01, Hiren Panchasara wrote:
> Let me know if this is not the correct place for this kind of
> questions.

Please quote more context.

You are probably referring to your earlier question about how to
configure mutt to sort like you want.

This /is/ a correct place for such questions ... but it's a
low-traffic group.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

[Hiren Panchasara]

On Feb 1, 12:09 pm, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+n...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-01, Hiren Panchasara wrote:
> > Let me know if this is not the correct place for this kind of
> > questions.
>
> Please quote more context.

Thanks Jorgen.

What I want is:

1) threaded mails.
2) If a new message arrives in a thread, that thread should be brought
to the top.

3) But the new message itself should be the last one in that

particular thread. Right now, it sticks right below the very first
message of that thread.
If this is new message is a reply to a message 'x' on thread, it
should come (below) 'x'.

My settings (which is not working):
set sort="threads"
set sort_browser="reverse-date"
set sort_aux="reverse-last-date-received"

Thanks!

[Hiren Panchasara]

On Feb 1, 1:17 pm, Jochen Schmid <pflhy...@gmx.net> wrote:

> On 2012-02-01 01:14 CET, Hiren Panchasara wrote:
>
> > Here I meant that the new message should come after(below) (and not
> > before(above)) the last message.
>

> Try:
>
> set sort=threads
> set sort_aux=last-date-received

With this, now, the new message in the thread is the last message (as
I need) but the thread itself is also the last thread. I want it to be
the first thread on my display.

Thanks,
Hiren

[anton]

Hi!

maybe this ?

set sort=reverse-threads
set sort_aux=last-date-received

best,

anton

[Hiren Panchasara]

On Feb 1, 10:48 pm, anton <an...@home.com> wrote:
> maybe this ?
>
> set sort=reverse-threads
> set sort_aux=last-date-received

That moves the most recent thread to the top but changes the order of
messages inside a thread.
i.e
__third message
|
| __second message
|
first message

Which is not what I want to achieve.

Thanks for the help though.
Hiren

[Hiren Panchasara]

> maybe this ?
>
> set sort=reverse-threads
> set sort_aux=last-date-received

Nope. So, it moves the most recent thread to top but also changes the
way messages in a thread are ordered/arranged.

i.e
| 35 (0.9K) │ ┌─>
| 36 (2.3K) ├─> third
| 37 (1.9K) ┌─> second
| 38 (0.6K) ┌─> first

what I want is:

|1496 (411K) first
|1497 (2.4K) └─> second
|1498 (2.8K) └─> third
|1499 (3.1K) └─>

Thanks for the help,
Hiren

[anton]

On 2012-02-02, Hiren Panchasara <hiren.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> maybe this ?
>>
>> set sort=reverse-threads
>> set sort_aux=last-date-received
>
> Nope. So, it moves the most recent thread to top but also changes the
> way messages in a thread are ordered/arranged.

right you are; and I haven't managed to accomplish this issue myself :-(
so I'm afraid I can't help.

Sorry for the noise,

best,
anton

[Hiren Panchasara]

> right you are; and I haven't managed to accomplish this issue myself :-(
> so I'm afraid I can't help.

No problem, Anton. Thanks for trying.

Anyone else has any idea?

[Frank Ursel]

Hiren Panchasara schrieb:

> Anyone else has any idea?

Not really, I think it's not possible the way you want it. But you can
send a bug/whishreport. :)

[guy1...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, February 7, 2012 3:04:36 AM UTC-5, Frank Ursel wrote:
> Hiren Panchasara schrieb:
>
> &gt; Anyone else has any idea?
>
> Not really, I think it&#39;s not possible the way you want it. But you can
> send a bug/whishreport. :)

Hi there, I'm having the same problem for a while now (well, since I'm using mutt), just checking if someone came up with a solutions.

Thanks.

[Héctor A. Abreu]

On 2012-02-01, Hiren Panchasara <hiren.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> What I want is:
>
> 1) threaded mails.
> 2) If a new message arrives in a thread, that thread should be brought
> to the top.
> 3) But the new message itself should be the last one in that
> particular thread. Right now, it sticks right below the very first
> message of that thread.
> If this is new message is a reply to a message 'x' on thread, it
> should come (below) 'x'.
>
> My settings (which is not working):
> set sort="threads"
> set sort_browser="reverse-date"
> set sort_aux="reverse-last-date-received"
>

Sorry for reviving an old conversation, but I would like to know if this
issue has been solved by anyone, or if there is a formal request or bug
report.

I think it makes sense to bring to the top the email thread containing
the new message, but with that new message being the last one (bottom)
of that particular thread. It's the way a popular email client like
GMail handles it, and it's the way that the newsreader I'm using (slrn)
handles it when I tell it to sort by thread + date.

I'm not saying that's the correct way, I am open to a different approach.
My preference is threading for inline posting, but I'm not sure if this
approach is more suitable for usenet than for email; and I say this
because email normally won't include my own messages in the thread, so
in that case the only advantage of threads in email will be to collapse
them in order to save space inside the screen, rather that showing the
full thread.

Thank you in advance for any hint or help.
--
Héctor A. Abreu

[Héctor A. Abreu]

On 2017-11-23, (Héctor A. Abreu) <inv...@invalid.com> <> wrote:
> On 2012-02-01, Hiren Panchasara <hiren.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What I want is:
>>
>> 1) threaded mails.
>> 2) If a new message arrives in a thread, that thread should be brought
>> to the top.
>> 3) But the new message itself should be the last one in that
>> particular thread. Right now, it sticks right below the very first
>> message of that thread.
>> If this is new message is a reply to a message 'x' on thread, it
>> should come (below) 'x'.
>>
>> My settings (which is not working):
>> set sort="threads"
>> set sort_browser="reverse-date"
>> set sort_aux="reverse-last-date-received"
>>
>
> Sorry for reviving an old conversation, but I would like to know if this
> issue has been solved by anyone, or if there is a formal request or bug
> report.
>
> I think it makes sense to bring to the top the email thread containing
> the new message, but with that new message being the last one (bottom)
> of that particular thread. It's the way a popular email client like
> GMail handles it, and it's the way that the newsreader I'm using (slrn)
> handles it when I tell it to sort by thread + date.
>

Alright, now it's working with the following values in .muttrc:

set sort = threads
set sort_aux = reverse-last-date-received
set index_format="%4C %3M%Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%?l?%4l&%4c?) %s"

Threads can be folded/unfolded normally with Esc-v and Esc-V.

The only difference with the original thread is $sort_browser, which I
didn't include. Not sure if that was the problem, I just know that it's
working now.

> I'm not saying that's the correct way, I am open to a different approach.
> My preference is threading for inline posting, but I'm not sure if this
> approach is more suitable for usenet than for email; and I say this
> because email normally won't include my own messages in the thread, so
> in that case the only advantage of threads in email will be to collapse
> them in order to save space inside the screen, rather that showing the
> full thread.
>

I'm still wondering if it's possible to show my own messages inside
threads in my INBOX without the need of copying all my sent messages to
my INBOX. Basically, to show my own messages only if they are part of a
thread.
--
Héctor A. Abreu

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Thu, 2017-11-23, (Héctor A. Abreu) <inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 2012-02-01, Hiren Panchasara <hiren.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What I want is:
>>
>> 1) threaded mails.
>> 2) If a new message arrives in a thread, that thread should be brought
>> to the top.
>> 3) But the new message itself should be the last one in that
>> particular thread. Right now, it sticks right below the very first
>> message of that thread.
>> If this is new message is a reply to a message 'x' on thread, it
>> should come (below) 'x'.
>>
>> My settings (which is not working):
>> set sort="threads"
>> set sort_browser="reverse-date"
>> set sort_aux="reverse-last-date-received"
>>
>
> Sorry for reviving an old conversation, but I would like to know if this
> issue has been solved by anyone, or if there is a formal request or bug
> report.

Reviving it was the right thing to do. I don't know the answer to
your question, though. Sorry.

> I think it makes sense to bring to the top the email thread containing
> the new message, but with that new message being the last one (bottom)
> of that particular thread. It's the way a popular email client like
> GMail handles it, and it's the way that the newsreader I'm using (slrn)
> handles it when I tell it to sort by thread + date.

That's how I configure slrn, too. That, plus scoring my own postings high,
and scoring replies to my postings high -- that's my slrn user interface.

> I'm not saying that's the correct way, I am open to a different approach.
> My preference is threading for inline posting,

What does "inline posting" mean? (Both your posting and the OP's 2012
posting are sometimes less clear than they could have been.)

> but I'm not sure if this approach is more suitable for usenet than
> for email; and I say this because email normally won't include my
> own messages in the thread, so in that case the only advantage of
> threads in email will be to collapse them in order to save space
> inside the screen, rather that showing the full thread.

I suspect it's not just for Usenet. Showing complete threads would be
good for mail, too -- at least when you have long mail discussions[0].

A year ago or so, I posted here about my intention to implement
virtual mail folders in Mutt, so I could look at the union of !,
=read and =sent, and see the actual mail thread. Sadly, that
project never happened.

I also feel it's time that someone takes another look at mail, and
creates something that's as obviously superior to what we have today
-- just like Git was obviously superior to Subversion. Mutt is good,
but my gut feeling is it can be done in a radically different, better
way.

(And with "different", I mean the user interface. I still want RFC
compliance, a console interface, mbox support, OpenPGP support and all
that.)

/Jorgen

[0] Granted, few seem to have long mail discussions these days.

[Héctor A. Abreu]

On 2017-11-23, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-11-23, (Héctor A. Abreu) <inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry for reviving an old conversation, but I would like to know if this
>> issue has been solved by anyone, or if there is a formal request or bug
>> report.
>
> Reviving it was the right thing to do. I don't know the answer to
> your question, though. Sorry.
>

I think it's working with the following values in .muttrc:

set sort = threads
set sort_aux = reverse-last-date-received
set index_format="%4C %3M%Z %{%b %d} %-15.15L (%?l?%4l&%4c?) %s"

>> I'm not saying that's the correct way, I am open to a different approach.
>> My preference is threading for inline posting,
>
> What does "inline posting" mean? (Both your posting and the OP's 2012
> posting are sometimes less clear than they could have been.)
>

I meant "inline replying" as a posting style, sorry. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

>> but I'm not sure if this approach is more suitable for usenet than
>> for email; and I say this because email normally won't include my
>> own messages in the thread, so in that case the only advantage of
>> threads in email will be to collapse them in order to save space
>> inside the screen, rather that showing the full thread.
>
> I suspect it's not just for Usenet. Showing complete threads would be
> good for mail, too -- at least when you have long mail discussions[0].
>
> A year ago or so, I posted here about my intention to implement
> virtual mail folders in Mutt, so I could look at the union of !,
> =read and =sent, and see the actual mail thread. Sadly, that
> project never happened.
>

That would be awsome, I guess one would need some knowledge on C and
S-Lang to contribute. I hope that conversation will be revived too.

Thank you for your reply.
--
Héctor A. Abreu

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Fri, 2017-11-24, (Héctor A. Abreu) <inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 2017-11-23, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:

...

>> A year ago or so, I posted here about my intention to implement
>> virtual mail folders in Mutt, so I could look at the union of !,
>> =read and =sent, and see the actual mail thread. Sadly, that
>> project never happened.
>
> That would be awsome, I guess one would need some knowledge on C and
> S-Lang to contribute. I hope that conversation will be revived too.

Not S-Lang, but yes, you'd have to be good at rewriting pretty
convoluted C code without breaking anything.

... to do what I wanted to do. Note that there may be other ways to
get approximately the same effect. I think I remember someone posting
about Maildir-based ideas ...

/Jorgen