From: Thomas Fini Hansen <beast@...>
Date: 2004-06-04T18:02:24+09:00
Subject: Re: Reply wasn't posted; will test new post

On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:58:57AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> At Thu, 3 Jun 2004 23:18:38 +0900,
> Dennis Oelkers wrote in [ruby-talk:102281]:
> > This leads to the conclusion that we have three possible solutions:
> > - Add an "In-Reply-To"/"References" flag to the header by using the
> >    message-id of THAT mail => the message would appear on c.l.r., but
> >    threading would be broken
> > - drop the message on the floor at the gateway => ruby-talk / c.l.r.
> >    are inconsistent
> > - my solution: as mua's are more or less allowed to do whatever they
> >    want my fear is that we get more and more of such borderline cases
> >    so the only solution is that we establish identical posting policies
> >    on both the mailing-list host and the gateway/nntp host we're posting
> >    too. (ML-Maintainers? Any Comments on this one?)
> 
> Though I'm not a ML maintainer, one possible solution is:
> 
> (1) revive subject tag (e.g. [ruby-talk:102281]).
> 
> (2) add following hook (originally posted in [ruby-list:27934])
>     to fml to construct Refereces: from the subject if necessary.

[snip perl]

Brilliant. Have the mailing list fix the messages. As far as I can
see, that should fix the problem, without bad sideeffects..

Now, you wouldn't happen to have a similar patch to Mailman. I could
use that. ;)

-- 
Thomas
beast@system-tnt.dk