Re: kmail no longer setting message-ID?
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am Freitag, 27. Dezember 2002 21:06 schrieb Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists:
> > On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > > No, its an optional setting with default to "off" because the kmail
> > > programmers realized (back in KDE2.2.2) that not the MUA is responsible
> > > for the Message-ID but the first MTA. Why? Because all dial-up computers
> > > create non-unique Message-ID because it cannot be assured that the
> > > servername part of the Message-ID is unique (mostly, a local dummy name
> > > is chosen). Unfortunately, some use local MTAs with locale names and the
> > > same thing happens.
> >
> > Um interesting. That also means, that by default one won't be able to
> > sync draft messages and the like (mailsync is relying on msg-ids for
> > synchronizations sake)
>
> Hmm, synchronisation might be an issue when done with the Message-ID header.
> But there _are_ other ways. Lets think about comparing the contents that are
> important information (like message content, To:, From:, CC:, BCC:, any
> more?).
Subject:
but are they guaranteed not to be mangled by MTAs and the like? I regulary
see cyrus replacing some characters in Subject: and From: that it doesn't
like.
That means for me that those headers are even less trustworthy than the
msg-id.
Could you correct me if I'm wrong?
> Maybe slower with masses but to get the header, you have to get the
> whole message anyway, don't you?
No you don't. You can just grab the header (IMAP supports that, POP
supports that etc.).
> Then ups, sorry, your mail messed up my threading. Actually, that's the worst
> that could happen, isn't it?
> But who cares about all this? Bored mailing list admins?
Erm - see mailsync.sf.net. If you want to synchronize mails between
different locations (that is copy, remove etc.) you need to have a means
to precisely identify a message.
The msg-id seems like not a that bad choice for it.
> BTW: What's the point in using IMAP when not using it as such (working online
> with an IMAP capable program that simply uses the draft from the server). Or
> maybe I did not get the point here?
Possibly because you don't want to do that. I work on various computers.
Some are allways online, some are mostly offline etc.
Syncing mail allows me to have all of my mails wherever I might work.
*t
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tomas Pospisek
SourcePole - Linux & Open Source Solutions
http://sourcepole.ch
Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11
-----------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: