Please share the code? I think you may be missing a chomp after fetching your subject header in your variable. This took a good amount of my time debugging why my thing wasn't working.
-- Nilesh On 01-Nov-2016 10:20 PM, "Alex Hall" <ah...@autodist.com> wrote: > Hey list, > I've been messing with Email_Local.pm for the last day, but I can't get it > to work correctly. I need to make the regex used to detect ticket replies > not require a space before the pound sign. I'm starting to suspect that > Outlook isn't removing that space, but rather replacing it with some > Unicode character no one can see, because I can't get this to work. I first > tried > /\[$test_name\s*\#(\d*)\s*\]/i > but that didn't work. So I replaced the first \s* with .* (period > asterisk) to tell it to match zero or more characters, no matter what they > are. That, too, fails to work. What I change here seems to have no effect. > Am I missing a file, other than RT/Interface/Email.pm? Is there some other > setting or bit of code where this regex is defined and use, or is this file > the only one? Thanks. > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Alex Hall <ah...@autodist.com> wrote: > >> You're right. After looking at what showed up on RT, not what was in the >> subject fields of the two clients, I have the problem. I think. >> >> It seems that Outlook is removing the space before the # (pound sign) in >> the subject tag. That is: >> Re: [Graphics #400] >> turns into >> Re: [Graphics#400] >> >> Looks like I get to play with the subject tag regex. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On Oct 31, 2016, at 10:16, Nilesh <m...@nileshgr.com> wrote: >> > >> > You should inspect the headers in both cases. If they contain >> in-reply-to, you >> > can use that to solve the problem. >> > >> > My problem originally was people in Cc replying to a mail sent to RT >> (and by >> > default, people in CC do not get auto reply email). This was >> successfully solved >> > by the in-reply-to patch. https://gist.github.com/nilesh >> gr/637cdacd1aa7710343aed >> > e20cabb66a6 >> > >> > Just save that file in local/lib/RT/Interface/Email_Local.pm and >> restart RT. >> > >> > -- >> > Nilesh >> > >> >> On Mon, 2016-10-31 at 19:36 +0530, Nilesh wrote: >> >> I don't think Re matters. As long as subject tag is intact it should >> get >> >> parsed correctly. >> >> -- >> >> Nilesh >> >> >> >>> On 31-Oct-2016 7:35 PM, "Alex Hall" <ah...@autodist.com> wrote: >> >>> I looked more closely at the difference. Outlook is stripping off the >> "Re: " >> >>> part of the message subject in the reply, whereas Gmail leaves it on. >> That's >> >>> the only difference I can find, but it must matter. I guess this is >> more an >> >>> Outlook question now, unless there's something I can change in RT to >> make it >> >>> not care about the Re: part of a reply? >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> >> >>>> On Oct 31, 2016, at 09:52, Nilesh <m...@nileshgr.com> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> On 31-Oct-2016 7:10 PM, "Alex Hall" <ah...@autodist.com> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Hey all, >> >>>>> I made a custom template with mailto: links in it, that comes from >> norep >> >>>> l...@example.com. The mailto: links populate the to: and subject: >> fields of >> >>>> the new message as they should, and when the new email is sent, a >> comment >> >>>> appears on the ticket. At least, if the user does this from the Gmail >> >>>> website (our domain mail is handled by Gmail). If the user is on >> Outlook, >> >>>> however, the "reply" gets turned into a new ticket. I can't see what >> the >> >>>> difference is, since the mailto: link is the same. We're on Outlook >> 2007, >> >>>> at least the few stations I've asked so far use 2007. Has anyone >> ever seen >> >>>> this before? Any troubleshooting suggestions? Thank you. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Alex Hall >> >>>>> Automatic Distributors, IT department >> >>>>> ah...@autodist.com >> >>>>> >> >>>>> --------- >> >>>>> RT 4.4 and RTIR training sessions, and a new workshop day! >> https://bestp >> >>>> ractical.com/training >> >>>>> * Los Angeles - Q1 2017 >> >>>> Have you verified that the subject tag isn't getting stripped? >> >>>> There are two ways to identify a reply - one via the subject and >> other via >> >>>> in-reply-to header which most clients insert. In-reply-to isn't >> parsed by >> >>>> RT, so a custom code is needed for that. >> >>>> I got it from someone on this list and have implemented as a local >> >>>> customization. >> >>>> -- >> >>>> Nilesh >> >>> >> >>> --------- >> >>> RT 4.4 and RTIR training sessions, and a new workshop day! >> https://bestpract >> >>> ical.com/training >> >>> * Los Angeles - Q1 2017 >> > > > > -- > Alex Hall > Automatic Distributors, IT department > ah...@autodist.com >
--------- RT 4.4 and RTIR training sessions, and a new workshop day! https://bestpractical.com/training * Los Angeles - Q1 2017