[clamav-users] Threading (Was: How can Clam/Cisco be so irresponsibly reckless and nonchalant to Windows users?)

[Groach]

Cheers Simon, thanks for the explanation of workings.  Noted.


On 18/02/2016 10:31, Simon Hobson wrote:Groach 
<groachmail-stopspammingme at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Consider my explanation of 'notification' above.  So now, how do I post a 'reply' to someone elses comment if I no longer have an "email notification" (to click 'REPLY' on)?
> What I usually do in that situation is to carefully copy the email subject as it appears in the archives and create a new email. The new email won't have any references headers to link it to the thread, but any half decent client and list archive should be capable of recognising the subject as being the same as the existing thread and link it in that way.
> Your message won't appear in the right place in the threaded view in the archives, but it should appear in the same thread.
>
> The same issue occurs for people getting a list digest.
>
> In theory, if it's presented, you could copy the message header from the archive and add that as a custom header (In-Replay-To:) to your email. Looking at the Mailman archive for the list it doesn't seem to be presented, but I suspect some archives may keep and display it.
> The key headers are :
>
> Message-Id:
> This should be a globally unique ID generated by your mail client.
>
> In-Reply-To:
> If you reply to an email, the In-Reply-To: header should be set to the Message-Id: of the message you reply to.
>
> References:
> This builds up as a message gets replied to over time. Each reply should be adding the Message-Id: to this so there ends up a chain of which messages let to this one.
>
> In-Reply-To: should be sufficient to put your message in the right place in the thread.
>
> What you must never ever do is select some random list message in an unrelated thread and hit reply - either to respond to an existing thread or to start a new one. Because this reply will include In-Reply-To: and probably References: headers, this will cause your unrelated message to get threaded into the wrong thread. If you are browsing an archive and find a seemingly unrelated thread intermingled with another one - this is probably the cause.