Hi everyone,
we recently upgraded our 3.4.1 RT to 3.6.4 and noticed an anoying change
in the behavior of sending status change notifications.
Formerly the sent mail had an “in-reply-to” and/or “references” header,
so mutt was able to display a complete ticket as thread.
But since 3.6.4 these header fields are missing, so the thread view is
quite uncomplete now.
Has anybody an idea how to fix this?
thanks,
Markus Wigge
Can anyone else replicate this? I haven’t seen it. (But it most
certainly would be a regression if it were reproducible)On Jul 17, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Markus Wigge wrote:
Hi everyone,
we recently upgraded our 3.4.1 RT to 3.6.4 and noticed an anoying
change
in the behavior of sending status change notifications.Formerly the sent mail had an “in-reply-to” and/or “references”
header,
so mutt was able to display a complete ticket as thread.But since 3.6.4 these header fields are missing, so the thread view is
quite uncomplete now.Has anybody an idea how to fix this?
thanks,
Markus Wigge
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
PGP.sig (186 Bytes)
Jesse,
I found this as well with the "autoreply" template. Our other templates
are customized so they may not count. What I got was:
tsg-rt@iss-mail.lbl.gov
In-Reply-To:
References: RT-Ticket-54325@lbl.gov
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-12722-1184615304-1789.54325-36-0@lbl.gov
The E_mail was received and recorded so I don't really see the problem
since the E_mail was not in reply to any form of correspondence but
generated due to a scrip. This may not be what you’re looking for.
However, I got the same thing in sending a reply from the ticket as well:Subject: [lbl.gov #54325] testing test script5
From: “Kenn Crocker via RT” tsg-rt@iss-mail.lbl.gov
Reply-To: tsg-rt@iss-mail.lbl.gov
In-Reply-To:
References: RT-Ticket-54325@lbl.gov
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-12825-1184697538-1922.54325-50277-0@lbl.gov
Hope this helps.
Kenn
LBNL
Jesse Vincent wrote:
Can anyone else replicate this? I haven’t seen it. (But it most
certainly would be a regression if it were reproducible)
Hi everyone,
we recently upgraded our 3.4.1 RT to 3.6.4 and noticed an anoying change
in the behavior of sending status change notifications.Formerly the sent mail had an “in-reply-to” and/or “references” header,
so mutt was able to display a complete ticket as thread.But since 3.6.4 these header fields are missing, so the thread view is
quite uncomplete now.Has anybody an idea how to fix this?
thanks,
Markus Wigge
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.comDiscover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Hi again,
Subject: [lbl.gov #54325] New Ticket Created!
From: “TSG Request Tracker Support / Technical Services via RT”
tsg-rt@iss-mail.lbl.gov
Reply-To: tsg-rt@iss-mail.lbl.gov
In-Reply-To:
References: RT-Ticket-54325@lbl.gov
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-12722-1184615304-1789.54325-36-0@lbl.gov
Well, thats quite the same for me. When I open a ticket using the web UI
I get email like:
In-Reply-To:
RT-Ticket: MarcanT #22324
References: RT-Ticket-22324@marcant.net
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-9626-1184663483-1654.22324-20-0@marcant.net
And as far as I understood it this is the correct behavior.
When I open a ticket by email on the other hand I get a “In-Reply-To”
entry as here:
In-Reply-To: 469C90DB.4020403@marcant.net
RT-Ticket: MarcanT #22327References: RT-Ticket-22327@marcant.net 469C90DB.4020403@marcant.net
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-22534-1184665822-587.22327-15-0@marcant.net
So this references the opening email correctly.
Now I add a comment to this ticket by mail or by web UI, that does’nt
matter:
Subject: Re: [MarcanT #22327] (support) test2 via mail [new]
In-Reply-To: 469C953C.6060507@marcant.net
RT-Ticket: MarcanT #22327
References: RT-Ticket-22327@marcant.net 469C90DB.4020403@marcant.net
rt-3.6.4-22534-1184665823-1034.22327-20-0@marcant.net
+469C953C.6060507@marcant.net
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-25160-1184666941-1863.22327-4-0@marcant.net
This comment references the ticket mail already sent to me, so my mail
client is able to display this as a thread.
But the worse things are status chages like “new to open” or “open to
resolved”:
Subject: [MarcanT #22327] Status Changed to: resolved
RT-Ticket: MarcanT #22327
Message-ID: rt-3.6.4-25159-1184666859-384.22327-36-0@marcant.net
nothing here, neither “In-Reply-To:” nor “References:”. Thus my client
displays these mails as separate mails not belonging to the ticket…
And this behavior definitivly changed from 3.4.1 to 3.6.{3,4}.
So now we are actually thinking about a downgrade to get back a working
threaded view.
bye,
Markus
And this behavior definitivly changed from 3.4.1 to 3.6.{3,4}.
So now we are actually thinking about a downgrade to get back a
working
threaded view.
I haven’t had time to reproduce it myself, but it’s definitely a
regression. And enough of one to push out 3.6.5 once it gets sorted out.
3.4.1 → 3.6.3 is…quite a jump. It would be really, really useful
to know if this broke between 3.4 and 3.6.0 or between 3.6.1 and
3.6.2 or 3.6.3. Knowing when it broke will help me fix it a lot more
quickly.
Jesse
PGP.sig (186 Bytes)
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@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
References: RT-Ticket-8991@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176217247-1914.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
0D6B0D3D889E2F47977901A316A532DAE0C12D@MADARRMAIL2.company.es
rt-3.6.HEAD-29928-1176217460-1101.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176395413-432.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144CF14@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176397091-440.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
789F8407-CE9B-41D9-A538-BB9F3A3A6666@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30070-1176410219-1527.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144D0DC@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
Message-Id:
rt-3.6.HEAD-8936-1183532383-1227.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Rt-Loop-Prevention: bestpractical.com
And things thread just fine.
Jesse
PGP.sig (186 Bytes)
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@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
References: RT-Ticket-8991@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176217247-1914.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
0D6B0D3D889E2F47977901A316A532DAE0C12D@MADARRMAIL2.company.es
rt-3.6.HEAD-29928-1176217460-1101.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176395413-432.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144CF14@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176397091-440.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
789F8407-CE9B-41D9-A538-BB9F3A3A6666@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30070-1176410219-1527.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144D0DC@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
Message-Id:
rt-3.6.HEAD-8936-1183532383-1227.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Rt-Loop-Prevention: bestpractical.comAnd 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
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,
JesseOn 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@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
References: RT-Ticket-8991@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176217247-1914.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
0D6B0D3D889E2F47977901A316A532DAE0C12D@MADARRMAIL2.company.es
rt-3.6.HEAD-29928-1176217460-1101.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176395413-432.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144CF14@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
rt-3.6.HEAD-30042-1176397091-440.8991-4-0@bestpractical.com
789F8407-CE9B-41D9-A538-BB9F3A3A6666@bestpractical.com
rt-3.6.HEAD-30070-1176410219-1527.8991-5-0@bestpractical.com
58902A3242FE224383CAA8A79D6003540144D0DC@MADARRMAIL1.company.es
Message-Id:
rt-3.6.HEAD-8936-1183532383-1227.8991-4-0@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
PGP.sig (186 Bytes)