Re: notmuch-reply doesn't use Reply-To
authorDavid Bremner <david@tethera.net>
Fri, 4 Dec 2015 12:07:19 +0000 (08:07 +2000)
committerW. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Sat, 20 Aug 2016 21:50:06 +0000 (14:50 -0700)
8b/60086974361eaca78c71220d76e716223bcb61 [new file with mode: 0644]

diff --git a/8b/60086974361eaca78c71220d76e716223bcb61 b/8b/60086974361eaca78c71220d76e716223bcb61
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..021795d
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+Return-Path: <david@tethera.net>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D276DE143A\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  4 Dec 2015 04:07:26 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.325\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.325 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.226,\r
+  RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.55, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id E8lm72Fybk8v for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Fri,  4 Dec 2015 04:07:24 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197])\r
+ by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F57E6DE1413\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri,  4 Dec 2015 04:07:24 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.84)\r
+ (envelope-from <david@tethera.net>)\r
+ id 1a4p8w-00079S-65; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 07:07:18 -0500\r
+Received: (nullmailer pid 6172 invoked by uid 1000);\r
+ Fri, 04 Dec 2015 12:07:19 -0000\r
+From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+To: Damien Cassou <damien@cassou.me>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: notmuch-reply doesn't use Reply-To\r
+In-Reply-To: <8737vjcx9b.fsf@cassou.me>\r
+References: <8737vjcx9b.fsf@cassou.me>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+7~g55fb7da (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 08:07:19 -0400\r
+Message-ID: <87610e8ljc.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 12:07:26 -0000\r
+\r
+Damien Cassou <damien@cassou.me> writes:\r
+\r
+> Hi,\r
+>\r
+> I've the impression that notmuch-reply doesn't respect the Reply-To\r
+> field: I've an email with a Reply-To field. But when I execute "notmuch\r
+> reply id:<msg-id>", the To: field is set to the From: field of the\r
+> original email and not to the Reply-To: field.\r
+>\r
+\r
+Hmm. The following test suggests it doesn't ignore reply-to completely.\r
+Maybe there is some side-effect from --reply-to=sender. What if you try\r
+omitting that?\r
+\r
+test_begin_subtest "Support for Reply-To"\r
+add_message '[from]="Sender <sender@example.com>"' \\r
+            [to]=test_suite@notmuchmail.org \\r
+            [subject]=notmuch-reply-test \\r
+           '[date]="Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:43:56 -0000"' \\r
+           '[body]="support for reply-to"' \\r
+           '[reply-to]="Sender <elsewhere@example.com>"'\r
+\r
+output=$(notmuch reply id:${gen_msg_id})\r
+test_expect_equal "$output" "From: Notmuch Test Suite <test_suite@notmuchmail.org>\r
+Subject: Re: notmuch-reply-test\r
+To: Sender <elsewhere@example.com>\r
+In-Reply-To: <${gen_msg_id}>\r
+References: <${gen_msg_id}>\r
+\r
+On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:43:56 -0000, Sender <sender@example.com> wrote:\r
+> support for reply-to"\r
+\r