[rt-users] I miss the "in-reply-to" header in status change notifications

[Jesse Vincent]

Markus,

Is your RT 3.6.4 wired up to a public email address? Would you be up  
for letting me correspond with you a bit via your RT to try to track  
this down?

Thanks,
Jesse

On Jul 19, 2007, at 2:34 AM, Joop wrote:

> Jesse Vincent wrote:
>>>
>>> And this behavior definitivly changed from 3.4.1 to 3.6.{3,4}.
>>>
>> FWIW, yes. we did do a _lot_ of work on references and in-reply-to  
>> between 3.4.1 and 3.6. But most of it was to get _more correct_  
>> header info.
>> Looking at a random message coming off of our 3.6.3+devel  
>> instance, I see this:
>>     In-Reply-To:      
>> <58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144D0DC at MADARRMAIL1.company.es>
>>     References:     <RT-Ticket-8991 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176217247-1914.8991-5-0 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <0D6B0D3D889E2F47977901A316A532DAE0C12D at MADARRMAIL2.company.es>  
>> <rt-3.6.HEAD-29928-1176217460-1101.8991-4-0 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176395413-432.8991-5-0 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144CF14 at MADARRMAIL1.company.es>  
>> <rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176397091-440.8991-4-0 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <789F8407-CE9B-41D9-A538-BB9F3A3A6666 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <rt-3.6.HEAD-30070-1176410219-1527.8991-5-0 at bestpractical.com>  
>> <58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144D0DC at MADARRMAIL1.company.es>
>>     Message-Id:      
>> <rt-3.6.HEAD-8936-1183532383-1227.8991-4-0 at bestpractical.com>
>>     Precedence:     bulk
>>     X-Rt-Loop-Prevention:     bestpractical.com
>> And things thread just fine.
> I just had a look at my mail file of Thunderbird and did a search  
> for 'In-Reply-To: <rt-3.6.1' which turned up only one hit the first  
> email so I'll need to have a look at my old email archive to look  
> back further. I didn't get any hits for 'In-Reply-To: <rt-3.6.2',  
> and had a lot of hits for 'In-Reply-To: <rt-3.6.3', no hits yet for  
> 'In-Reply-To: <rt-3.6.4'
> May be this helps in finding when problems started.
>
> Joop
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-users/attachments/20070719/1550b839/attachment.sig>