On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 4:14 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 10:07:38PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
> > > I noticed that one of my messages never made it to the HTTP page:
> > > 20210119190720.GL8560@telsasoft.com
> >
> > I see it in the archives, and in my local mail folder too.
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210119190720.GL8560@telsasoft.com
>
> Ok...I must have entered it wrong somehow.
>
> So the problem is that it doesn't show up here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20170907194236.4cefce96%40wp.localdomain
>
> Is it because I used two IDs in reply-to headers?
>
> In-Reply-To: <CAFiTN-updTo3aB+7vsECHOHpjB23Av5OfgZQrt90Q33gFK-oZQ@mail.gmail.com>
> <CAFiTN-utJPbTLQ9i10wT_zmHX=un+RQMB1B1xbkTgrh971vqjw@mail.gmail.com>
>
> In mutt, I would've 't'agged two messages, and then ';'-'r' to reply and quote both.
Yeah, I think that's it. We only parse a single value in the in-reply-to.
Normally this shouldn't be a problem, because normally the messageid
is also listed in References, but your message doesn't appear to
contain *any* References header. Which should normally be a list of
all the previous messages in the thread.
Have you done something in your config to specifically turn off adding
of References headers? It seems strange we haven't seen this before...
And yes, a quick look at the RFC shows that multiple values in
In-reply-to is allowed. The problem is that this is one of the most
broken fields as to what MUAs put in there -- the vast majority who
put more than one field in there, puts in something in a completely
broken format. So traditionally this has been much easier to ignore,
and to rely on the References header for those cases.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/