Email discussion (was: Re: policy around 'wontfix' bug tag)
- Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:46:02 -0500
- From: rhkramer@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Email discussion (was: Re: policy around 'wontfix' bug tag)
Just changing the subject--maybe someone can make a more specific subject line.
On Tuesday, February 06, 2018 08:34:11 AM Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2018-02-05 18:01:08 +0000, Brian wrote:
> > Now you have problems (or could have). The first problem is that the
> > "duplicates" are not duplicates because the headers are different. The
> > second problem is - which one do you wish to keep? The third problem
> > (related to the second one) is the order in which the messages arrive.
> > Is it the mailing list reply first or the Cc:?
> > Users of mutt have it easy:
> > send-hook . 'unmy_hdr Message-ID:'
> > send-hook 'debian-user@lists\.debian\.org' 'my_hdr Message-ID:<`date
> > +"%Y%m%d%H%M%S"`NoCcsPlease@xxxxxxxxxxx>'
> > A mail with NoCcsPlease in its In-Reply-To or References headers can
> > only have had the mailing list mail as its source. However, the CC will
> > not contain a List-ID: header. This makes it possible to distinguish
> > between a list mail and a CC. Procmail recipes based on these two
> > conditions can now file list mail with certainty and, if desired, delete
> > CCs.
> If this is just a private reply, you will lose mail, unless the
> procmail recipe also tests the To/Cc headers against the list address
> (hoping the list server doesn't drop mail for some reason).