From: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
To: Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>, Austin Clements
	<amdragon@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: header continuation issue in notmuch frontend/alot/pythons email
	module
In-Reply-To: <20130624085710.31827.41792@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de>
References: <20130623131145.2526.439@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de>
	<20130623165938.GA2214@mit.edu>
	<20130624085710.31827.41792@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.9-101-g81dad07 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:19:32 +0200
Message-ID: <8738s7kgrf.fsf@schwinge.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Cc: notmuch mailing list <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi!

On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:57:10 +0200, Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-h=
amburg.de> wrote:
> Quoting Austin Clements (2013-06-23 18:59:39)
> > Quoth Justus Winter on Jun 23 at  3:11 pm:
> > > I recently had a problem replying to a mail written by Thomas Schwinge
> > > using an oldish notmuch. Not sure if it has been fixed in more recent

"Oldish", yeah, yeah, I know...  (Mumbles someting about long TODO list.)

> > > versions, but I think notmuch could improve uppon its header
> > > generation (see below). Problematic part of the mail:
> > >=20
> > > ~~~ snip ~~~
> > > [...]
> > > To: someone@example.org, "line
> > >  break" <linebreak@example.org>, someoneelse@example.org
> > > User-Agent: Notmuch/0.9-101-g81dad07 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/2=
3.4.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu)
> > > [...]
> > > ~~~ snap ~~~

> > Do you happen to know how the strangely folded "to" header was
> > produced for this message?

I just entered/copied all the addresses into one long To: line, and then
let message-mode do its thing.

> No, but Thomas might. Thomas, the problematic message is
> id:877ghpqckb.fsf@kepler.schwinge.homeip.net

Here is the header from the message as I sent it:

    To: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@gnu.org>, Justus Winter
     <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>, fotis.koutoulakis@gmail.com, Ian
     Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>, toscano.pino@tiscali.it, Luis Machado
     <lgustavo@codesourcery.com>, =3D?utf-8?B?6ZmG5bKz?=3D
     <hacklu.newborn@gmail.com>

And this is what I received from the bug-hurd mailing list:

    To: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@gnu.org>, Justus Winter
    	<4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>, <fotis.koutoulakis@gmail.com>, "I=
an
    	Lance Taylor" <iant@google.com>, <toscano.pino@tiscali.it>, Luis Macha=
do
    	<lgustavo@codesourcery.com>,
    	=3D?utf-8?B?6ZmG5bKz?=3D <hacklu.newborn@gmail.com>

So the "corruption" (if it is declared as one; I don't have time right
now to follow your RFC interpretation) must have happened after sending
it off -- perhaps my company's Microsoft Exchange server (as Justus
received a direct copy from that one), or even msmtp used as the local
MTA.


Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe,
 Thomas

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRyA8kAAoJENuKOtuXzphJ3e8H/2SOhqjUnh0EqSgERmqwApsb
bb05uBqjkeEPEnBWvlP3lLNDDiLBqo365W4l/UDulVLnBGZpziiVdtnYcwVvnQiB
ttqhrDSTkWb2fnk41j6fda64xP+UJP36NGECPjmLPi+eU8dpaNfeF+41ZEShN2uZ
Bp1wbwMwOxEJwkLdShQPlZ6qMDrX8skCx5vxErdRTBb/ZLHLTJ4wDuMrWXL6IXXk
3Dg+S5VPCtDUL6QHrbp0fgJEtKanDrXn4cp/pMZ98HUuuwdsILiQVMD2OZqDMIiC
UI6m4AG2J8ZNUjgqzpoD3uVRgaBi9ggz4vPVCFaWPraVJBPP8qB6+sznVLX7zrE=
=MWpo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--