Message-Id: <200006300811.LAA16312@alpha.netvision.net.il>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:12:54 +0200
To: Nate Eldredge <neldredge AT hmc DOT edu>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.2.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <83pup09mtb.fsf@mercury.bitbucket> (message from Nate Eldredge on
	29 Jun 2000 14:53:04 -0700)
Subject: Re: Sort error in mailclient (!!!!)
References: <00c601bfe150$6964a4e0$0500007b AT brk> <83pup09mtb DOT fsf AT mercury DOT bitbucket>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: Nate Eldredge <neldredge AT hmc DOT edu>
> Date: 29 Jun 2000 14:53:04 -0700
> 
> I believe they put djgpp AT delorie DOT com in the "CC" instead of the "To"
> field.  So you could sort on "CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com".

I'd expect people sort mail by the subject, not by the address.  The
same subject can be discussed with several different correspondents,
and relying on address formatting is not a good idea anyway, as the
original poster just discovered.

FWIW, I was using this type of addressing for as long as I'm involved
with DJGPP, and nobody complained.