Cyrus Daboo (daboo@cyrusoft.com)
Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:30:59 -0700
--On Thursday, December 13, 2001 1:43 PM -0800 Mark Crispin
<MRC@cac.washington.edu> wrote:
>> Personally, I don't see much utility in SORT. I think that >99% of its
>> actual use will be as a poor substitute for what THREAD does.
>> Everything else SORT does can be done on the client side using the
>> results from FETCH ENVELOPE. (More accurately, I don't think SORT
>> can justify itself in the presence of THREAD.)
By that same argument, you can say that there is no utility to THREAD
because threading can be done on the client too (you just need to do a
fetch for References headers as well as envelope).
> I won't go that far; there is a limited set of circumstances in which
> SORT is useful. Pine does put SORT to good use. But Pine also uses
> THREAD, and it seems that more and more people are turning to threading
> rather than sorting.
>
> But I agree with the overall sentiment. THREAD, not SORT, is the
> interesting extension. It is incomprehensible to me why people want to
> waste incredible amounts of time on SORT extensions, VIEW, etc., which
> are all meaningless for THREAD.
I would say its 50-50 use between sort and thread. I know personally there
are mailboxes I prefer to view by thread and ones I prefer to view sorted -
just depends on the nature of the content. There are also situations where
I want to do a sort within thread.
-- Cyrus Daboo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Dec 14 2001 - 00:31:26 IST