The following reply was made to PR mutt/1116; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: mutt/1116: Fails to thread properly without an @ in msg ID Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 12:59:23 +0100
Part of the problem is that there's little way to extract message-IDs from "In-Reply-To" headers -- except looking for valid syntax. -- Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On 2007-03-02 12:45:02 +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > From: Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Mutt Developers <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 12:45:02 +0100 > Subject: Re: mutt/1116: Fails to thread properly without an @ in msg ID > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Spam-Level: > > The following reply was made to PR mutt/1116; it has been noted by GNATS. > > From: Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Cameron Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: mutt/1116: Fails to thread properly without an @ in msg ID > Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 12:48:25 +0100 > > Re: Cameron Simpson 2007-03-02 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That DOES NOT say that the "@" is optional. It says that the text on the > > right of the "@" need not be a domain. > > Point taken, though mutt should still try to handle these properly. > > Christoph > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.df7cb.de/ > > >
