From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BDF41F619; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:20:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:20:01 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: meta@public-inbox.org Subject: Re: How to force stricter threading Message-ID: <20200311102001.GA13172@dcvr> References: <20200309131539.wx56ntf7cb3gpozh@chatter.i7.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200309131539.wx56ntf7cb3gpozh@chatter.i7.local> List-Id: Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > Hello: > > I think public-inbox currently does some heuristic-based threading, > which may actually not be that useful. For example: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-renesas-soc/20200217101741.3758-1-geert+renesas@glider.be/ > > None of the [PATCH] messages have references or in-reply-to set, but for > some reason they are threaded together. I can generally see this being > useful for exact subject matches, but in this case all of the subjects > are different (despite being similar). That's a strange bug. Will have to look at it another time. > Is there a way to enforce stricter threading rules? Right now, it's a combination of strict threading based on references/in-reply-to and exact subject matching by hash. It could be possible to disable the subject matching part... But that case is a strange bug which I'll have to examine more closely another time (maybe later this week, but more likely next).