Hi Steve, *, On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 11:11:46AM +0100, Steve Davies wrote: > On 7/11/06, jef_e <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Artur Jachacy wrote: > >> Charles Kerr wrote: > >>> Can anyone think of a reason for Pan to /not/ behave that way? > > > >> Because that's not how it's been done. That should be reason enough. > > :) I can kind of agree with the sentiment... > > In fact I think that the sort by oldest/first in thread is appropriate > for binary groups where the order that the posts in a thread STARTED > arriving is appropriate to keep things grouped nicely. On the other > hand a text-only group is often read more like email, and in email > terms sort by most recent/last in thread is more appropriate so that > newly updated threads are grouped.
I disagree. (Well, I'm used to the other sorting for a couple of years, so maybe it is just trained behaviour that I like just because I always did it that way....) For that purpose, I'd more like a default filter "show threads with unread messages" That should do approx. the same as sorting by newest post but without breaking the "tradidtional" sorting. > Again, the ideal solution is probably a per-group setting - How about > having the sort-by-date clicker have 4 states instead of two? Well - I don't mind whether this is a per-group setting or not - as long as I can turn it off :-) > [...] ciao Christian _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
