On 21Jul2022 10:29, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephenjturnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>As long as Discourse provides the In-Reply-To header field, the current
>threading algorithm would work reasonably well.
Discourse does not do `In-Reply-To:` very well at all. Here's some
headers from the _second_ post in the "Core dev sprint this year"
thread:
Message-ID: <topic/17208/60568.898edf234f56cf6f3a661...@discuss.python.org>
In-Reply-To: <topic/17...@discuss.python.org>
References: <topic/17...@discuss.python.org>
The first post has this:
Message-ID: <topic/17208.dc83577b18fc3ecc438ed...@discuss.python.org>
References: <topic/17...@discuss.python.org>
So at present Discourse's email implementation is buggy. I need to
submit a bug report.
In essense: The `References` and `In-Reply-To` headers cite a
_nonexistent_ message-id which just denotes the thread number in the web
forum.
By contrast, the message-id itself at least is nice and unique.
_However_, someone participating in "email mode" will of course send a
message with its own distinct message-id from their source system, and
that does not survive the email->discourse->email-out process. So your
local copy of the message, if you keep one (I do) it will be a distinct
duplicate message in your mail folder. I don't expect that to change.
Anyway:
- Discourse does provide `In-Reply-To` and `References`
- they're bogus
- they can be fixed (I'll submit a bug report, someone told me how to do
that...)
Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au>
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/I26HZ7LJLTDGCG2APQ7BYP3YKT4IMIYZ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
