Bug 25594

it also would be nice to have something like "attach message th thread" and be 
able to specify where exactly to put it.

In short, I think that messages with the same subject that include an RE: should be put together as a thread if this option is set in the preferences.  Mutt has a similar feature it refers to as "aggressive threading"

With 3.3 beta 1 (and maybe even older releases) there are two options "Thread messages" and "Thread messages also by subject" which is what you want I presume. If nobody objects I will close this soon.

No, this is *not* the same.

Threading by subject does not do proper threading, messages are attached to the thread at the wrong place.  I agree with the original requestor that it would be very nice to arbitrarily fix In-Reply-To headers, i.e. attach a message to an arbitrary mail in an arbitrary thread.

If anything, this bug should be merged with 53252

*** Bug 53252 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 31073 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 86284 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 86129 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Please look at the bug # 61891 where I suggested solution to threading 
problems

Costia: IMHO automatic thread fixing will never, in practice, be totally reliable.  I still wish for the ability to arbitrarily attach messages to threads.

Bug # 86284 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug.

I personally can't see here where it is mentioned the ability to BREAK threads?

I totally agree, and this is one of the things that keeps me as a mutt user for the time being. Manually fixing threads (linking *and* breaking) is a must-have for me.

In mutt it works like this: for linking a message to another, first tag the message to be linked to another (press t) then go to the target message and press &. Voila, the tagged message gets an In-Reply-To header pointing to the target message.

Breaking is even easier, pressing # removes any In-Reply-To header, which is awesome for fixing threads that result from someone answering to a mail but being completely off-topic.

Possible solutions:

Ok, breaking a thread is easy to mimic (create filter that removes the needed headers, bind that to a shortcut).

What about linking? Filters can add headers, but I'd need to know the msg-id for this to work. I could look it up, but then I'd have to edit the filter first, then run it. Any better solution?

>>> Ok, breaking a thread is easy to mimic (create filter that removes the needed headers, bind that to a shortcut). <<<
 
Hmmm.  Because of the significant number of Outlook users (etc.), I use threading by subject, too...

So, so far no comments/results/opinions about ability manually 
thread/untread email messages ? 

Seems like an important topic for users , no ?

> Seems like an important topic for users , no ? 

It is, definitely...

Costia:  Don't know what exactly you're referring to.  I don't run HEAD usually, and KDE 3.4 hasn't added anything like the desired features, so I'm not sure what comments you'd like to see.  If HEAD really did add something, I'd be inclined to try, but last time I tried it was pretty much impossible for the uninitiated to just compile kmail (I don't want to scrap my KDE install, after all...)

Adrian , actually, I am just trying to raise this important
issue again, just in case someone from KMail development team
is reading this thread and considers ability to classify
messages as important part of work with information ( email ).
I.E. ability to manually define threading, in my opinion,
is much higher in priority than any other of the wishlists
I've seen so far.
That is the reason, I am wondering why this topic hasn't got
the attention it should. 


P.S. just about recently (3-5) days ago, another information-management
tool ( livejournal.com ) has added exactly the ability to define where
piece of information belongs to. It is very sad to see that KMail still
doesn't give me an ability to organize my content the way I feel it should
be organized. ( i.e. manually define which thread message belongs to ).

As long as we have still more than 700 bugs, many of them crashes, it is very 
unlikely that anyone from the core team will get to this before, say, 2013. 
So if this is so important to you (this wish doesn't really have many votes, 
so I'm wondering if others feel the same way), implement it yourself, or 
find/pay someone to do so. This is Free Software after all. Note that I'm not 
saying this to be grumpy, I just thought I'd tell you that it's not realistic 
to wait for us to implement this any time soon, sadly.

Cheers, and thanks for using KMail,

Till

Till !

Thank you for the reply.

Unfortunately, the voting system does not always reflect
the most important features to consider ( you would need to 
define at least the level(competence ) of the reviewer to
have more complete picture ( i.e. is the person software developer/user,
if developer - how many years developing software etc ). 
Anyhow, ability to have a 2-dimensional view on your Inbox gives you
ability to classify the messages, similar to having
"group" (alt.linux.development)  in news reader ( imagine having all 
the news messages in your inbox without group classifications ).
Personal inbox contains a bit less information , but nonetheless,- ability
to define to which "topic" they belong is not less important than the 
case described above.
Personally, I'd love to dip into exploring Kmail's code - but afraid
that it will take me much more time to understand it, even more - add
anything usefull to it ( as developer, coming from windows ).
Let's hope this question can reach the needed magnitude for the development
team to leverage it's resources ( no pressure intended ).

Sincerely, Costia.

P.S. Thank you for creating a usable email client!

Breaking threads already works with KMail, you just need to create a filter:

Filter Criteria:
Match all of the following
  <size> is greater than or equal to 0

Filter Action:
Remove Header: In-Reply-To
Remove Header: References

Advanced: ONLY check 
"Add this filter to the Apply Filter menu" and
"Additionally add this filter to the toolbar" (and select a nice icon)

Now, if people highjack threads, simpy select the message and click the toolbar button. Be aware that the two headers will be permanently deleted, you will not be able to undo the thread breaking.

*** Bug 131120 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Still no ability for the user to add messages to threads manually, without creating filters ? I'll have to create folders for each thread, then ! :)

It seems, it makes sense to close this "bug". Since, after 5 years of discussions noone from development teams finds this feature important enough to put it in roadmap plan it can be removed from bugtraq to reduce amount of unsolved bugs ?
Just as a summary - the feature was - ability to manually define which thread messages belong to, i.e. manual threading.

It's an open wishlist item.  The fact that nobody had time to code something up doesn't mean there's not people who still wish for that feature.

*** Bug 185666 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Reassigning to KMail2 as it seems still valid. Please comment if you think otherwise.

I doubt this is still relevant.

There is still no feature that lets you add a message to a thread. And while it is possible to remove a message from a thread using the filter technique described by Thomas in #20, it requires non-trivial setup that most users won't think of by themselves. So I think this wish is still relevant.

I think this feature request is still very much relevant.

(In reply to Karsten Dambekalns from comment #12)
> Ok, breaking a thread is easy to mimic (create filter that removes the
> needed headers, bind that to a shortcut).
> 
> What about linking? Filters can add headers, but I'd need to know the msg-id
> for this to work. I could look it up, but then I'd have to edit the filter
> first, then run it. Any better solution?

This seems to indicate almost all functionality is present in KMail except for filters that can take two (or more... In-Reply-To may contain multiple ids) ordered arguments (highlighted mails), no?

Created attachment 121801 [details]
different choices for one entry

Wanted to show how the list appears.
I think it should be better to have a checkable list.
For Instance, Qogir has some very interesting themes, but with this interface, intalling them all is impossible.

(In reply to Altery Disroot from comment #30)
> Wanted to show how the list appears.
> I think it should be better to have a checkable list.
> For Instance, Qogir has some very interesting themes, but with this
> interface, intalling them all is impossible.
Wrong bug?