Re: Threading; was Re: HTTP shimmed to HTTPS
Hi.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:56:36AM -0700, peter@easthope.ca wrote:
> * From: Reco ?recoverym4n@enotuniq.net?
> * Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:35:27 +0300
> > You're breaking threading. Just a friendly note.
>
> I've been adding References manually. By "breaking" do you refer to
> omission of older references (For example,
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2019/07/msg01131.html has only two
> references whereas it was about 8 from the original.)
This. And, I have to add, you're adding them wrong.
What you do is a violation of RFC2822:
References: [🔎] E1hp6Yw-0002Kn-6g@enotuniq.net [🔎] E1hpYQe-0000tm-Lx@dalton.invalid [🔎] E1hpZan-0001lu-Df@enotuniq.net
What sane MUA does to be RFC2822-compliant is:
References: <[🔎] E1hp6Yw-0002Kn-6g@enotuniq.net> <[🔎] E1hpYQe-0000tm-Lx@dalton.invalid> <[🔎] E1hpZan-0001lu-Df@enotuniq.net>
> or to the presence of links labelled [ & # 128270; ]? ( <== Spaces
> inserted to suppress character reference.)
Does not bother me. You e-mails look somewhat unusual, but it's a part
of my job to deal with malformed e-mails. I've seen stranger e-mails.
It is a problem for other participants of this maillist though.
> The omission is only that I failed to put all of them.
Also, quoting RFC2822,
The "References:" field will contain the contents of the parent's
"References:" field (if any) followed by the contents of the parent's
"Message-ID:" field (if any).
So, the omission of certain values from parent's "References" also
violates RFC2822. On a side note, your e-mails lack "In-Reply-To"
header, and that can break threading for some MUAs. Again, RFC2822.
In short, please consider using another e-mail client. Implementing
RFC2822 by hand in every e-mail you write is something that should not
require a human intervention.
ktnxbye, Reco
Reply to: