Re: Custom threads
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 12:31:10PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
>
> did you try to translate the RT-Ticket headers to standard In-Reply-To:
> headers using procmail?
>
Actually i haven't tried that one.
But as i was digging through message headers, i noticed, that RT tries to set
the In-Reply-To: header, but as RT itself even does not know the real
Message-ID of messages it has sent earlier (because it sends out different
messages to people with different roles and has no way to record these ID-s),
it sets the In-Reply-To: header as follows:
In-Reply-To: <rt-1827@xxxxxxxx>
So this shows that Mutt does not thread, based on this type of ID. Though i am
not familiar with corresponding RFC-s i suppose that this ID is violating some
RFC-s, so that mutt renders it invalid and does not thread based on it.
Therefore i suppose that when using procmail to generate In-Reply-To from some
other header-field, the result is the same - no threads.
Another curious thing i noticed was that even with strict_threads off, messages
with these tree subjects do not thread up:
[eenet.ee #1827] [TEST] test 2
[eenet.ee #1827] [TEST] test 2
[eenet.ee #1827] [TEST] test 2
these are not the only ones that have identical subject, but do not thread up.
Any idea why not? As all of them came the same way to me, when viewing them
with full headers shown, only dates and random strings (those in ID-s and such)
change, everything else stays the same.
Laas Toom
--
EENeti arendusosakond
Raekoja plats 14
Laas.Toom@xxxxxxxx
tel. 7 302 110