GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 632692
Thread by In-Reply-To, then first found reference
Last modified: 2010-11-13 14:51:04 UTC
Created attachment 172844 [details] test messages as mbox file Instead of the following threading JB1 → AB1 → JB2 → AB2 → JB3 → AB3 → JB4 → AB4 → JB5 the actual threading is like the following. JB1 → AB1 → JB2 → AB2 → JB3 → AB3 → JB4 → AB4 → JB5 I am attaching the messages from the dri-devel thread [1] in a mbox file. JB2 has the following in its message header. From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Subject: Re: [BISECTED, -next] drm/i915: blurred HDMI output Message-ID: <20101018122801.6a09dd25@jbarnes-desktop> In-Reply-To: <201010182114.00329.arnd@arndb.de> References: <201010171937.13642.arnd@arndb.de> <20101018115648.09bac8be@jbarnes-desktop> <201010182114.00329.arnd@arndb.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) The wrong threaded AB2 has the following entries. Subject: Re: [BISECTED, -next] drm/i915: blurred HDMI output Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:57:05 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-rc7-next-20101015+; KDE/4.5.1; x86_64; ; ) References: <201010171937.13642.arnd@arndb.de> <201010182114.00329.arnd@arndb.de> <20101018122801.6a09dd25@jbarnes-desktop> In-Reply-To: <20101018122801.6a09dd25@jbarnes-desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201010182157.05339.arnd@arndb.de> The IDs match, so there must be a bug somewhere. I am using Debian Sid/unstable with Evolution 2.30.3-2 [2]. [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2010-October/004818.html [2] http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/e/evolution/evolution_2.30.3-2/changelog#versionversion2.30.3-2
Thanks for a bug report and data, I can reproduce it too. It depends also on the order in which are messages passed into the threading routine. If I change sorting by date in the reverse order then I can get the right output. But this is obviously not the right thing. See [1] for the RFC and how the In-Reply-To and References should work. Evolution was expecting to have latest reference as the last one there. When it was searching for the parent message, then it was moving through all references, thus the message could end up under the first message in References header, which is not right, because Evolution should prefer the In-Reply-To from the References header. [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.4
Created attachment 174204 [details] [review] eds patch for evolution-data-server; This is fixing the issue.
Created commit f36d730 in eds master (2.91.3+) Created commit 5f2e357 in eds gnome-2-32 (2.32.1+)
(In reply to comment #1) > Thanks for a bug report and data, I can reproduce it too. It depends also on > the order in which are messages passed into the threading routine. If I change > sorting by date in the reverse order then I can get the right output. But this > is obviously not the right thing. > > See [1] for the RFC and how the In-Reply-To and References should work. > Evolution was expecting to have latest reference as the last one there. When it > was searching for the parent message, then it was moving through all > references, thus the message could end up under the first message in References > header, which is not right, because Evolution should prefer the In-Reply-To > from the References header. Thank you for fixing this problem. Looking at the problem again I found that the reply with KMail missed the Message ID <20101018115648.09bac8be@jbarnes-desktop> in `References`. I reported this in the KDE BTS as [2]. > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.4 [2] https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=256809
(In reply to comment #3) > Created commit f36d730 in eds master (2.91.3+) > Created commit 5f2e357 in eds gnome-2-32 (2.32.1+) This problem has the number 603372 in the Debian BTS. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=603372