296571 - Extra text in Message-Id header copied into In-Reply-To and References

Status: NEW

(MailNews Core :: Composition, defect)

Description

[Greg Colyer]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511

Incoming message has header

Message-Id: <string@domain> (added by postmaster@domain)

Reproducible: Didn't try

Steps to Reproduce:

Actual Results:  
Reply has headers

In-Reply-To: <string@domain> (added by postmaster@domain)
References: <string@domain> (added by postmaster@domain)

Expected Results:  
Reply should perhaps have headers

In-Reply-To: <string@domain>
References: <string@domain>

Comment 1

[Greg Colyer]

See also bug 3764.

Comment 2

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01".

This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that
bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are
highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code.

While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we
are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce
this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a
copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and
you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug
(given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more
reproduction information if you have it.

If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not
changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved.
Thank you for your help in this matter.

The latest beta releases can be obtained from:
Firefox:     http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/
Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html
Seamonkey:   http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

Comment 3

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above
comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.

Comment 4

[Karsten Düsterloh]

This is still an issue, especially since we don't even _understand_ comments in References: headers when showing those in the UI of SM/TB!

RfC 5536, section 3.2.10, states:

   o  Comments in CFWS between message identifiers can cause
      interoperability problems, so comments SHOULD NOT be generated but
      MUST be accepted.