Re: can't post to "linux.debian.user" "solved"
> My messages were posted, but they didn't show up in the proper place
> in the threads in Mozilla. References and In-Reply-To looked correct
> so I don't know what happened
Note how you are currently reading uncorrupted Message-ID
<[🔎] 87657e4w8d.fsf@jidanni.org> at gmane.org, and
<god_knows_what@gated-at.bofh.it> on
http://groups.google.com/groups?group=linux.debian.user
I suppose one is supposed to put both Message-ID's into the References
header if one follows-up.
Here is what ensued when I protested those taking artistic licence
with my article's licence plates.
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:05:47 +0200
From: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>
To: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Cc: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>, rao@gnu.org, jidanni@jidanni.org
Subject: Re: [jidanni@jidanni.org: stop rewriting Message-IDs]
On Sep 26, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
>I don't follow why this implies a problem. Aren't message-ids of
>email messages unique already?
Not always... And there is also the problem of multiple gateways, when I
started working on linux.* I was not rewriting the Message-IDs and
*many* people complained about this.
As I explained yesterday to the mailman developers, there is also the
problem of the Usenet Message-ID rules being stricter than RFC 822, so
many valid (or formally invalid but working) mail Message-IDs would
have to be rewritten anyway.
Considered all things I think that this complaint is bogus and rewriting
Message-IDs is not a problem for users and solves enough problems that
it's not worth the effort of finding a way to only rewrite some of them.
>It would appear that the only reason for a duplication is if the same
>message has already been gatewayed to news. In that case, rejecting the
>duplicate seems harmless. Is there a problem consequence I don't see?
It could have been gated by a different gateway in a different group.
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>
Cc: barry@python.org, rao@gnu.org, jidanni@jidanni.org
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:49:30 -0400
>It would appear that the only reason for a duplication is if the same
>message has already been gatewayed to news. In that case, rejecting the
>duplicate seems harmless. Is there a problem consequence I don't see?
It could have been gated by a different gateway in a different group.
That seems a pretty strong reason to rewrite them.
Reply to: