I have a thread with 103 messages as display in attached screenshot: when I collapse it, the summary page don't show last incoming unread message. I don't know if missing only bold enphasys or don't is show the last message because the thread has more messages.

After I little test, I can says that the last messages displayed is the 100: the summary has an upper bound limit set to 100 messages?

that is what i would suspect from: > ... (Note: 103 messages are selected, the first 100 are shown) right?

(In reply to comment #2) > that is what i would suspect from: > > ... (Note: 103 messages are selected, the first 100 are shown) > > right? Yes it is: when I click on the last (bottom) message in summary page, TB select message in 100 position on message list.

AFAIK this was an intentional limit so that we didn't display too much at one time and lock up the app.

Correct. It might be good to have a way to say "show more", but that'd be an RFE.

(In reply to comment #4) > AFAIK this was an intentional limit It seems to me that I read this on the past. But I think that if limit is exceeded, summary should be display alway last messages: e.g. in my case thread has 103 message and summary display from message 1 to 100. I think is right to display from 3 to 103 (103 is last unread message).

(In reply to comment #5) > Correct. It might be good to have a way to say "show more", but that'd be an > RFE. For my point of view should be a bug. I think that summary should be display alway last 100 messages (it is right for performance). If I want to see prevoius message I can using for example a "show previous" message.

Maybe, but I'm not convinced. In some cases it could make sense to show the last N, in other cases it might make sense to show the first N.

maybe the current sortby settings of the thread pane should be used to determine the messages to display? in sql speak: if we have a sort asc (oldest first): "SORT BY date ASC" -> message 1 - 100 if we have a sort desc (newest first): "SORT BY date DESC"W -> message 103-3 what do you think?

(In reply to comment #9) > if we have a sort asc (oldest first): "SORT BY date ASC" -> message 1 - 100 > if we have a sort desc (newest first): "SORT BY date DESC"W -> message 103-3 This might be reasonable