User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040626 Firefox/0.9.1 I always display msgs in reverse-chronological order (ie. youngest email first) by clicking on the "Date" header to have arrow point up. Sometimes I want to read a complete thread and I click on the "Click to display Message thread" column header. But when I do that, all the messages (within and outside the threads) become sorted chronologically. If I click a second time, it re-establishes the reverse-chronological date ordering outside the threads and chronological ordering within the thread - which is what I expect. The default should be the latter, not the former! For the longest time, I didn't even know that I could click on that icon multiple times - since it doesn't have any "direction" indicator like other columns (e.g. the arrow on "Date".) Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Bring up mail click on "Date" in msg window until reverse date order appears. 2. Click on "Click to display Message thread" column header Actual Results: All messages, including thread members, are chronologically ordered. Expected Results: Maintain the reverse-chronological ordering previously specified or _at least_ provide visual feedback that this header can change ordering!
I'm finding the description of the undesirable behavior hard to understand. I'm *guessing* that what is meant is: when the Thread column header is clicked, the Sort Ordering is changed from Descending to Ascending. Yes, it does this; however, you can change the behavior. Bug 219787 implemented a tweak such that, if you set a preference, clicking the thread column header doesn't affect the sort criterion or ordering; and bug 234690 implemented a UI for that preference. If this is what you meant, please mark this bug as a dupe of 219787.
Bug also occurs on Mozilla Thunderbird/Fedora Core 3. All other details the same.
No response from reporter; duping. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 219787 ***