Email threading in RT 3.0.2: worse than in RT 2

Hello,

in RT 2.0.14 we loved that RT keeps threading information well. It gave
"In-Reply-To" an “References” Header correctly to customer and admin
emails, so MUAs which support threading, displayed the email correspondance
hierarchical.

Since RT3 the feature has gone. There is always exactly one "In-Reply-To"
Header to a artificial message id rt@, hence threading
in MUAs does not work.

Will you give us the threading feature again?

Regards,
Dirk.

Hello,

in RT 2.0.14 we loved that RT keeps threading information well. It gave
"In-Reply-To" an “References” Header correctly to customer and admin
emails, so MUAs which support threading, displayed the email correspondance
hierarchical.

Since RT3 the feature has gone. There is always exactly one "In-Reply-To"
Header to a artificial message id rt@, hence threading
in MUAs does not work.

Will you give us the threading feature again?

Moreover, RT’s In-Reply-To: header contains the first real message-id
I’ve seen that fails mutt’s heuristic for detecting message-ids. This
is necessary because syntactically, message-id and email address aren’t
always distinguishable in in-reply-to headers from old mailers, and was
annoying when mutt threaded together all the replies to messages by
certain users.

Might I suggest the behavior of preserving In-Reply-To and References,
but perhaps also assigning a longer ticket message-id, and using it in
in-reply to if there is no preexisting in-reply-to. In addition, it
could be added as the oldest ancestor in references (probably a good
idea to make sure that it isn’t already there somewhere first) so all
conversations about the ticket would get attached together at the top
level by smart mailers like mutt.

-Dan

That feature never made it into the RT2 Core. perhaps you were runnning
a third party patch? It’s on the vague list for RT3.0.x, but will happen
quicker if someone provides a clean patch.

-jOn Mon, May 12, 2003 at 05:53:32PM +0200, Dirk Pape wrote:

Hello,

in RT 2.0.14 we loved that RT keeps threading information well. It gave
"In-Reply-To" an “References” Header correctly to customer and admin
emails, so MUAs which support threading, displayed the email correspondance
hierarchical.

Since RT3 the feature has gone. There is always exactly one "In-Reply-To"
Header to a artificial message id rt@, hence threading
in MUAs does not work.

Will you give us the threading feature again?

Regards,
Dirk.


rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Have you read the FAQ? The RT FAQ Manager lives at http://fsck.com/rtfm

http://www.bestpractical.com/rt – Trouble Ticketing. Free.

Hello Jesse

–Am Montag, 12. Mai 2003 19:16 Uhr -0400 schrieb Jesse Vincent
jesse@bestpractical.com:

That feature never made it into the RT2 Core. perhaps you were runnning
a third party patch? It’s on the vague list for RT3.0.x, but will happen
quicker if someone provides a clean patch.

I am sure, I were not runnig a third party patch. Perhaps RT2 was different
in not stripping In-Reply-To- and Reference-Headers form mails, when
external MUAs created them.

This would be a step one to restore threading functionality in RT3.

step two would be that RT3 creates meaningful Headers as well, when mail is
created from the web interface.

step three: guessing meaningful Headers for mail which comes from extern
from MUAs that do not care about creating/preserve them.

I will try to look into this soon.

Dirk.

Hello Jesse,

–Am Dienstag, 13. Mai 2003 8:47 Uhr +0200 schrieb Dirk Pape
pape-rt@inf.fu-berlin.de:

I am sure, I were not runnig a third party patch. Perhaps RT2 was
different in not stripping In-Reply-To- and Reference-Headers form
mails, when external MUAs created them.

This would be a step one to restore threading functionality in RT3.

I attach a patch that make me almost happy. It

a) preserves all threading information, if RT is used as “gateway” between
customer’s and admin’s MUAs.
b) it always adds a reference to the first message of a ticket, so basic
threading also works, if correspondance is through the web interface.

to do: support creating more appropriate headers for correspondance from
web interface (tracking which part of a ticket is replied to).

Dirk.

SendEmail_Local.pm (2.14 KB)