From 7aabe67fb0d45e77d98f60f18ed40a21f8c3b251 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Erik Quaeghebeur Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 20:45:49 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Re: Message-ID's vs. Resent-Message-ID --- 36/625548bc27b7a632a4f475a74b025aa618ac06 | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+) create mode 100644 36/625548bc27b7a632a4f475a74b025aa618ac06 diff --git a/36/625548bc27b7a632a4f475a74b025aa618ac06 b/36/625548bc27b7a632a4f475a74b025aa618ac06 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8a8ab18c7 --- /dev/null +++ b/36/625548bc27b7a632a4f475a74b025aa618ac06 @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2CF26DE140C + for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:45:57 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.668 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, + DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, + RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] + autolearn=disabled +Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id 48T6wt_8sy0V for ; + Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:45:55 -0800 (PST) +Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com + [66.111.4.28]) + by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22B686DE0C66 + for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:45:54 -0800 (PST) +Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) + by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4278520214 + for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:45:52 -0500 (EST) +Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) + by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:45:52 -0500 +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nospammail.net; h= + content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to + :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc + :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=8mNiB4QbBc1LdY63YGWan2v8aNo=; b=No2kFU + 3NAM7jTx6ngRTl/GL5LwgQIeFz/jtYDpJ0LR1vSfdOhZXro0JYHjyB+XBceonBGo + ByQjbUIVFLMEvy21DM9vatOrVp0JOmwnxzyiFiCgAz1eWpQOMlLGo16NP5VCtcNZ + JPRIX+bhmgJ5wlh4IPvuF/6ryGn6Y/SZ8jEIQ= +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= + messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type + :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references + :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=8mNiB4QbBc1LdY6 + 3YGWan2v8aNo=; b=p6JmCdWqYhuITAgL26PbzEuCvMxrZghHKR6/8hA4x/H9ygY + ZXzMvGLNCIQp1gVOxMhJ4i5S34++vl53JzeNTDW7okohVx0aIeSv34W/G/TaHqG8 + jqR6HvI8FTyGI9lJ2d4Dh/N8pLJrQZ7GQvDmU44BsD12nYGBruBPt+UHb+b4= +X-Sasl-enc: CWzHu6H+b47jIe+d9ilPwVmN6nFUra8PKu+ghvKqd1Ru 1452455151 +Received: from sysoppad.localnet (cust-5286ecc8.wba.access.stipte.nl + [82.134.236.200]) + by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E8295C00017 + for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:45:51 -0500 (EST) +From: Erik Quaeghebeur +To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: Message-ID's vs. Resent-Message-ID +Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 20:45:49 +0100 +Message-ID: <1797484.KB5JPIe8ts@sysoppad> +User-Agent: KMail/4.14.8 (Linux/4.1.12-gentoo; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; ) +In-Reply-To: +References: <2154153.mZhPRoAGrk@sysoppad> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:45:58 -0000 + +Thanks, Tomi, for your quick response. + +> > * If yes, for resent messages +> > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2822#section-3.6.6), does notmuch use +> > (the chronologically last) Resent-Message-ID, or the Message-ID? +> +> the Message-ID + +Hmm. Is this a conscious decision, or is the resending case just not taken into account? + +What happens if I have both a message and my own copy of it after resending it to somebody else? I would like to have a record of whom I resent it to, as with forwarded messages (where the forwarded message does have a different message id). + +Are the Resent-* headers of the resent message merged into the database entry? I guess this last question is more general: with multiple messages with the same Message-ID but differences (for whatever reason), how will these messages be merged in the database? + + +Best, + +Erik -- 2.26.2