From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Joe Wells Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#335: bug tracking system leads to duplicate replies appearing Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 11:27:59 +0100 Message-ID: <86hccgw0gg.fsf@macs.hw.ac.uk> References: <86r6bkwxmw.fsf@macs.hw.ac.uk> Reply-To: Joe Wells , 335@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1212144727 15507 80.91.229.12 (30 May 2008 10:52:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:52:07 +0000 (UTC) To: 335@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 30 12:52:44 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K22Dz-0000lu-SR for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 12:52:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43508 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K22DE-0006y6-CF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 06:51:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K22D9-0006xy-Jq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 06:51:51 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K22D7-0006xE-Sv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 06:51:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55418 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K22D7-0006x5-Il for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 06:51:49 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:52375) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K22D5-00061P-9T for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 06:51:48 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m4UApjpW022401; Fri, 30 May 2008 03:51:45 -0700 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m4UAZ3uN017785; Fri, 30 May 2008 03:35:03 -0700 X-Loop: don@donarmstrong.com Resent-From: Joe Wells Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:35:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: don@donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 335 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 335-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B335.121214330116556 (code B ref 335); Fri, 30 May 2008 10:35:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 335) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 30 May 2008 10:28:21 +0000 Original-Received: from mail-r4.hw.ac.uk (mail-r.hw.ac.uk [137.195.101.219]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m4UASG1F016549 for <335@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Fri, 30 May 2008 03:28:18 -0700 Original-Received: from izanami.macs.hw.ac.uk ([137.195.13.6]) by mail-r.hw.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1K21px-0006mr-1F for 335@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:27:53 +0100 Original-Received: from selene.macs.hw.ac.uk ([137.195.27.40]:36306 helo=127.0.0.1) by izanami.macs.hw.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 4.51) id 1K21pw-0001Yf-R2 for 335@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; Fri, 30 May 2008 11:27:52 +0100 Original-Received: (nullmailer pid 11100 invoked by uid 1001); Fri, 30 May 2008 10:27:59 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Don Armstrong's message of "Thu\, 29 May 2008 20\:20\:31 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-HW-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the HW Helpdesk for more information X-HW-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-HW-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=0, required 5, autolearn=not spam) X-HW-MailScanner-From: jbw@macs.hw.ac.uk X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 06:51:50 -0400 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:18188 Archived-At: Don Armstrong writes: > On Thu, 29 May 2008, Joe Wells wrote: >> I believe this is due to messages being addressed to both >> bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org and XYZ@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com where XYZ >> is the bug number. When someone follows up, their message gets sent >> to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org twice, because everything sent to >> XYZ@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com will also be sent onward to >> bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org. > > This is because people are using reply-to-all, instead of > reply-to-list or reply-to. I can resolve this by discarding duplicate > message ids, but thats more of a sledgehammer. Far better would be for > people to stop being silly and using reply-to-all, and instead use > reply-to-list or reply-to, both of which are set properly and behave > correctly. Unfortunately, there is no way to know whether all of the recipient addresses in a message are on the mailing list. Even if this is so for one mailing list, it might not be the case for other mailing lists. So people can not in general rely on the behavior of any =E2=80=9Creply=E2=80=9D function of their mail program to reach the right p= eople. In this case, a good solution is that the bug tracking software could make sure to always omit bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org from the list of recipients whenever XYZ@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com is going to be one of the recipients. This will work in this case because anything sent to XYZ@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com will also get sent to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org. I notice that you just now have started adding a Mail-Followup-To header. This is a good idea. I notice that don@donarmstrong.com is not in the Mail-Followup-To header. I'm curious, how does your software know to omit this address? Do you receive a copy of all bug report traffic regardless? >> Interestingly, by the time these two copies show up in the >> gnu.emacs.bug USENET newsgroup, they have the two different message >> IDs and >> . >> >> By the way, it seems at first glance that none of these are the >> original message ID of Stefan's message, but instead these are fresh >> message IDs chosen by the bug tracking software and mailing list >> software. At least the two message IDs that begin with =E2=80=9Cmailman= =E2=80=9D are >> definitely fresh. These pieces of software should *not* be making up >> fresh message IDs.=20 > > Debbugs has nothing to do with these message IDs; it adds > Resent-Message-Id: for the messages which it forwards, and retains the > original Message-Id:. Most likely this is something to do with the > mailman list-to-news gateway. Indeed, the =E2=80=9Cmailman=E2=80=9D prefix of the message IDs hints at th= is. I don't know how the mailman software maintainers can justify this. When I wrote my report, it seemed to me that the message ID might have been generated by your software. I am happy to hear this is not the case. --=20 Joe --=20 Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC000278.