This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Viewing patches in bugzilla just got easier and nicer
On Fri, 8 Jan 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Daniel Berlin <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Daniel Berlin <email@example.com> writes:
| > | The patch reader software has now been installed.
| > Any chance to have bugzilla threads messages correctly, as already
| > requested in the past?
| This isn't possible without saving a lot more information to the
| database than we do now, which is nothing (if you look at the msgids,
| you'll see they follow a certain scheme, which is how it generates the
| references and in-reply-to headers)
| In particular, we'd have to guess at which comment you were replying
| to, etc.
well, I'm lost as to where you're driving at.
The flat "in reply to comment ####" is also difficult to follow.
This is because comments have no reference to what comment they are a
reply to. IE they aren't threaded in the db.
This is significantly hard.
It does. but you only ever get one reference, because it makes all the
message ids the same. This threads them all under the first New: bug
message for me in pine, though not as replies to each other, instead as
replies to the New bug message.
Another useful thing about having the references in the message
headers is that they can be displayed nicely., independent of wheter
you're oneline clicking on mozilla or offline reading messages with
regular mail agents .
Why can't bugzilla store the references in the message headers?
Bugzilla doesn't store the list of messages ids it hsa sent out
for a bug, and even if we did, we don't know what they are replies to, so
how could we possibly generate references headers and in-reply-to that
"thread" as you like?
I mean, i could store such a list, but right now, it's only one message
id per bug.
Even if we changed that, there is no way to make in-reply-to correct
without knowing which are replies and which aren't. So what exactly are
you looking for it to do?