Created attachment 364666 [details] Mail that causes evo to reply to folder rather than to reply-to Description of problem: When replying to certain people on fedora-devel, evolution recently started posting mails to a folder instead of replying to the mailing list. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): evolution-2.26.3-1.fc11.x86_64 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Subscribe to fedora-devel-list 2. Reply to a mail from Rex Dieter Actual results: The compose window shows the "Post to:" field instead of the usual "To:" field. "View -> To Field" is greyed out so I cannot manually add a recipient. "Post To:" is set to "mbox:/home/chris/.evolution/mail/local/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel", although I don't even have that folder. After sending the mail the folder gets created, but the message is not in there, it's still in "Sent". The folder gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel is not a real folder: I cannot move or copy it and the folder's properties return an error: "Error while Opening folder mbox:/home/chris/.evolution/mail/local#gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel. Cannot get folder 'gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel': not a regular file." But this is described at https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=598249 and is something we don't need to triage here. I'm here for the strange prpblem with reply to sender. Expected results: The mail should be sent to the reply-to address of the mail I was replying to. Additional info: Message has a valid reply-to: Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list> Full text of the mail is attached.
According to https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=274340 evo prefers "List-post:" over "Reply-to:" but this cannot explain what I see, because List-post: is <fedora-devel-list>.
I do not think it's evolution's fault, as the message is presenting itself as being received from a news group. Maybe the certain senders are sending messages through a news group, and the list manager doesn't remove particular headers from the message, to indicate it's sending a mailing list, not a news group. Of course, evolution shouldn't create strange folders in a local store. I tried with 2.28 and I cannot reproduce that. When I import your message, and hit Ctrl+R (Reply to a sender), then I have an empty To. With Reply to all (Ctrl+Shift+R) I have set To as a proper mail, the fedora mailing list. Finally, using Reply to List (Ctrl+L) is having To filled with the list address, as expected. I wonder whether some change between 2.26 and 2.28 made this work differently in the recent stable version, or if it's something with your setup causing different behaviour on your machine. Are you able to test with 2.28, please? Or maybe when Fedora 12 will be released, then try out there?
(In reply to comment #2) > I do not think it's evolution's fault, as the message is presenting itself as > being received from a news group. Maybe the certain senders are sending > messages through a news group, and the list manager doesn't remove particular > headers from the message, to indicate it's sending a mailing list, not a news > group. Yeah, Rex uses gmane for reading and posting to fedora-devel. But what headers are you referring to when you say the mail is presenting itself as nntp? IMO this surely is a bug: - The message has both a valid reply-to as a post-to, so they should be used. - The "To:" Field should not be greyed out so I manually can add recipients > Of course, evolution shouldn't create strange folders in a local store. > > I tried with 2.28 and I cannot reproduce that. When I import your message, and > hit Ctrl+R (Reply to a sender), then I have an empty To. Which already is a bug as there are enough headers to fill that empty To. > With Reply to all > (Ctrl+Shift+R) I have set To as a proper mail, the fedora mailing list. Then I get both reply to folder gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel as well as to fedora-devel-list. BTW: does sent to folder work for you or are the mails still in "Sent"? > Finally, using Reply to List (Ctrl+L) is having To filled with the list > address, as expected. Indeed, this works, but it's not intuitive as the command is not available from the right click menu. > I wonder whether some change between 2.26 and 2.28 made this work differently > in the recent stable version, or if it's something with your setup causing > different behaviour on your machine. > > Are you able to test with 2.28, please? Or maybe when Fedora 12 will be > released, then try out there? I will test with a livecd and get back to you. Setting needinfo again so I don't forget it.
(In reply to comment #3) > Yeah, Rex uses gmane for reading and posting to fedora-devel. But what headers > are you referring to when you say the mail is presenting itself as nntp? The Followup-to and others described in http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2076#section-3.5 and subsequent RFC 1036. (I forgot to paste links to RFCs earlier.) > IMO this surely is a bug: > - The message has both a valid reply-to as a post-to, so they should be used. > - The "To:" Field should not be greyed out so I manually can add recipients I understood it as evolution prefers NNTP replies for messages which indicate they are NNTP messages. It also disables the To field, as that is not usable in NNTP communication. That's how I understand it. > > hit Ctrl+R (Reply to a sender), then I have an empty To. > > Which already is a bug as there are enough headers to fill that empty To. I didn't investigate further, thus I cannot tell. I thought of a different setup, as I mentioned below. > > With Reply to all > > (Ctrl+Shift+R) I have set To as a proper mail, the fedora mailing list. > > Then I get both reply to folder gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel as well as to > fedora-devel-list. > BTW: does sent to folder work for you or are the mails still in "Sent"? I cannot tell, as I do not get here that gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel. > > Finally, using Reply to List (Ctrl+L) is having To filled with the list > > address, as expected. > > Indeed, this works, but it's not intuitive as the command is not available > from the right click menu. Heh, there cannot be everything in the popup menu, really. > I will test with a livecd and get back to you. Thanks in advance.
I just found, quite old, upstream bug for the same: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=260995 I believe it's describing the same issue. Can you check, please? As if so, we can move any further discussion to the upstream bug, as this is not Fedora specific issue.
(In reply to comment #2) > Are you able to test with 2.28, please? Or maybe when Fedora 12 will be > released, then try out there? I have tested with F12 beta and the problem doesn't occur there. As you said, the To: field is empty, but this is a bug too. (In reply to comment #3) > Yeah, Rex uses gmane for reading and posting to fedora-devel. Just for the record, this is not correct. He uses gmane with knode. (In reply to comment #4) > The Followup-to and others described in > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2076#section-3.5 > and subsequent RFC 1036. (I forgot to paste links to RFCs earlier.) RFC 2076 states: "In e-mail, this header may occur in a message which is sent to both e-mail and Usenet News, to show where follow-up in Usenet news is wanted. The header does not say anything about where follow-up in e-mail is to be sent." I'm sending an email, not an nntp message. I have not even configured nntp, so evo should use Reply-To. > I understood it as evolution prefers NNTP replies for messages which indicate > they are NNTP messages. It also disables the To field, as that is not usable in > NNTP communication. That's how I understand it. This is a possible explanation, but it's still wrong. Followup-To doesn't necessarily indicate it's nntp. (In reply to comment #5) > I just found, quite old, upstream bug for the same: > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=260995 > > I believe it's describing the same issue. Can you check, please? As if so, we > can move any further discussion to the upstream bug, as this is not Fedora > specific issue. Indeed, this seems to be the same issue. I have added a comment, but unfortunately I cannot really move the discussion upstream as I lack sufficient privileges to change some fields. Additionally none of the bugs I reported against evolution ever got any response from the developers (except from Matt adding himself as CC).
I'm closing this as upstream, in favour of the old bug. Please file a new bug for empty To field upstream, and the best add a link here as well (I was unable to find a bug upstream for this issue). Thanks in advance.
Actually, after I reread the upstream bug, I'm going to close it, as it's working as expected in the actual stable, 2.28, thus there lefts only that empty To field.
(In reply to comment #8) > Actually, after I reread the upstream bug, I'm going to close it, as it's > working as expected in the actual stable, 2.28 Can you please explain what you mean with "working as expected"? IMHO the expected behavior is: 1. The presence of an invisible nntp header should not make the mail being handled differently, because this is by no means intuitive, so it cannot be expected. 2. "Reply" should reply to Reply-To: 3. "Reply to all" should Reply to Reply-To: and directly to the sender in From: Note that this is subject to further discussion that should take place upstream. (In reply to comment #7) > Please file a new bug > for empty To field upstream, and the best add a link here as well I prefer modifying and reopening this bug, so no information gets lost.
We are discussing two different things here, which is kinda hard to read already. The things are: a) reply goes to "gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel": About the same is the old upstream bug. And as it doesn't do that in actual stable, then it's fixed and therefore I closed the old upstream bug. b) reply has empty To: New and totally different issue from the initial. It's slightly related, but it's a different issue. Here I need a new upstream bug report, because it's not fedora specific. Of course, I want to have here a link to the new upstream bug for a reference. I hope you understand my point of view now.
Err, OK, I reread your upstream comment, and I'm reopening it. Please forget of the new bug report, my fault.