Charles Kerr wrote:
[...]
> Why does the (07/08 05:07) article come later? Because it got a
> followup at (07/09 03:00 PM) from Walt after the Suse RPM mail came in...
Hah! I feel the surge of intoxicating power flow through my...um...
Oops. Wrong list, sorry.
After further contemplation I th
Artur Jachacy wrote:
Charles Kerr wrote:
But stating it in those clear terms, though, I realized:
I can't think of any /need/ to sort by the oldest post.
Maybe the cleanest fix is that, when sorting by date in the header pane,
threads are *always* sorted by the date of the thread's newest post.
