registry subject tracking problem

registry subject tracking problem

[Jake Colman]

I've referenced this problem already elsewhere but it was buried inside
of a much larger thread.  I'm raising it again in its own thread and
providing more data.

I just upgraded to No Gnus 0.7 so I am using the latest code as of this
week.

I sent an email from a folder with gcc-self specified.  I received a
reply to that email but the reply was not filed correctly by the
registry.  Ted has already help me determine that the emails that I am
getting are missing the typical headers used by the registry (they are
coming through an old version MS Exchange Server which is probably
stripping the headers) which is why I need to work harder to get the
message traced properly. So I have turned on the registry's extra
tracking by subject.

The initial message's headers are as follows:

===========================================================

  To: is@ppllc.com
  Subject: Build Issue with XRT Licensing
  X-Attribution: Jake
  X-URL: http://www.ppllc.com
  X-Draft-From: ("nnimap+hamilton:INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues" "")
  From: Jake Colman <colman@ppllc.com>
  Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 14:35:20 -0500
  Message-ID: <76zluc8sqv.fsf@dev-d01.ppllc.com>
  User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.17 (usg-unix-v)
  MIME-Version: 1.0
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

===========================================================

I find the following entry is .gnus.registry.eld:

("<76zluc8sqv.fsf@dev-d01.ppllc.com>" ((mtime 18347 34824 532917) (sender . "Jake Colman <colman@ppllc.com>") (subject . "Build Issue with XRT Licensing")) "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues")

The email sent in reply, has the following headers:

===========================================================

  Received: by hamilton.ppllc.com 
	  id <01C86A60.3AF26D30@hamilton.ppllc.com>; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:38:11 -0500
  Message-ID: <0B72769B5EA61E45BFDAB9B849923FE703359C09@hamilton.ppllc.com>
  From: Mark Vosteen <vosteen@ppllc.com>
  To: Jacob Colman <colman@ppllc.com>
  Subject: RE: Build Issue with XRT Licensing
  Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:38:11 -0500 
  MIME-Version: 1.0
  Content-Type: text/plain

===========================================================

I manually moved this email where I had hoped the registry would file
it.  I now find the following entry in .gnus.registry.eld (which,
incidentally, appears earlier in the list than the first one):

("<0B72769B5EA61E45BFDAB9B849923FE703359C09@hamilton.ppllc.com>" ((mtime 18348 30274 550938) (sender . "Mark Vosteen <vosteen@ppllc.com>") (subject . "Build Issue with XRT Licensing")) "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues")

The problem is that if I execute (message-fetch-field "subject") on
these two messages, I get different results.

For the first message I get:

"Build Issue with XRT Licensing"

For the second message I get:

"RE: Build Issue with XRT Licensing, Build Issue with XRT Licensing"

Would this discrepency explain why my message did not get filed
correctly?

TIA!

...Jake

-- 
Jake Colman
Director of Software Development
Principia Partners LLC
101 West Elm Street
Suite 620
Conshohocken, PA  19428
+1 (610) 755-9786
www.principiapartners.com

Re: registry subject tracking problem

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:09:43 -0500 Jake Colman <colman@ppllc.com> wrote: 

Jake> The initial message's headers are as follows:
Jake>   Subject: Build Issue with XRT Licensing
Jake> I find the following entry is .gnus.registry.eld:
Jake> ("<76zluc8sqv.fsf@dev-d01.ppllc.com>" ((mtime 18347 34824 532917) (sender . "Jake Colman <colman@ppllc.com>") (subject . "Build Issue with XRT Licensing")) "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues")

Jake> The email sent in reply, has the following headers:
Jake>   Subject: RE: Build Issue with XRT Licensing

Jake> I manually moved this email where I had hoped the registry would file
Jake> it.  I now find the following entry in .gnus.registry.eld (which,
Jake> incidentally, appears earlier in the list than the first one):

Jake> ("<0B72769B5EA61E45BFDAB9B849923FE703359C09@hamilton.ppllc.com>" ((mtime 18348 30274 550938) (sender . "Mark Vosteen <vosteen@ppllc.com>") (subject . "Build Issue with XRT Licensing")) "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues")

Jake> The problem is that if I execute (message-fetch-field "subject") on
Jake> these two messages, I get different results.

Jake> For the first message I get:

Jake> "Build Issue with XRT Licensing"

Jake> For the second message I get:

Jake> "RE: Build Issue with XRT Licensing, Build Issue with XRT Licensing"

Strange, I get only the original subject (with RE:, but that's removed
in the registry by gnus-simplify-subject).  I don't know why the subject
is not retrieved properly from the second e-mail.  You must have called
message-fetch-field in a strange context.

In any case, note that the subject was extracted properly for the second
message since the registry entry has the right subject.  So from now on,
messages with that subject should go to "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues".

Can you grep the registry file for "Build Issue with XRT Licensing" and
see if it shows up in any other groups?  That would be a reason why the
followup didn't go to the right place.

I'll do the logging improvements we discussed earlier.  Sorry for the
delay, but I've been too busy with a new baby :)

Ted

Re: registry subject tracking problem

[Jake Colman]

>>>>> "TZ" == Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:

   TZ> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:09:43 -0500 Jake Colman <colman@ppllc.com> wrote: 

   Jake> The initial message's headers are as follows:
   Jake> Subject: Build Issue with XRT Licensing
   Jake> I find the following entry is .gnus.registry.eld:
   Jake> ("<76zluc8sqv.fsf@dev-d01.ppllc.com>" ((mtime 18347 34824 532917)
   Jake> (sender . "Jake Colman <colman@ppllc.com>") (subject . "Build Issue
   Jake> with XRT Licensing")) "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues")

   Jake> The email sent in reply, has the following headers:
   Jake> Subject: RE: Build Issue with XRT Licensing

   Jake> I manually moved this email where I had hoped the registry would file
   Jake> it.  I now find the following entry in .gnus.registry.eld (which,
   Jake> incidentally, appears earlier in the list than the first one):

   Jake> ("<0B72769B5EA61E45BFDAB9B849923FE703359C09@hamilton.ppllc.com>"
   Jake> ((mtime 18348 30274 550938) (sender . "Mark Vosteen
   Jake> <vosteen@ppllc.com>") (subject . "Build Issue with XRT Licensing"))
   Jake> "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues")

   Jake> The problem is that if I execute (message-fetch-field "subject") on
   Jake> these two messages, I get different results.

   Jake> For the first message I get:

   Jake> "Build Issue with XRT Licensing"

   Jake> For the second message I get:

   Jake> "RE: Build Issue with XRT Licensing, Build Issue with XRT Licensing"

   TZ> Strange, I get only the original subject (with RE:, but that's removed
   TZ> in the registry by gnus-simplify-subject).  I don't know why the subject
   TZ> is not retrieved properly from the second e-mail.  You must have called
   TZ> message-fetch-field in a strange context.

   TZ> In any case, note that the subject was extracted properly for the second
   TZ> message since the registry entry has the right subject.  So from now on,
   TZ> messages with that subject should go to "INBOX/Principia/IS_Issues".

   TZ> Can you grep the registry file for "Build Issue with XRT Licensing" and
   TZ> see if it shows up in any other groups?  That would be a reason why the
   TZ> followup didn't go to the right place.

   TZ> I'll do the logging improvements we discussed earlier.  Sorry for the
   TZ> delay, but I've been too busy with a new baby :)

   TZ> Ted

Ted,

I grepped the registry and all relevant entries contain the correct
subject and the correct target group.  And I agree that the registry got
it right yet it didn't trace it correct anyway!

Let me know when the new logging improvements are ready and I'll try
them out.  For my purposes, since so many messages don't get filed
correctly, a debug option that shows me what you know about the message
and how you traced it would be very helpful.

Thanks.

...Jake

P.S. Congrats on the new baby.  We have 6 of our own!

-- 
Jake Colman
Director of Software Development
Principia Partners LLC
101 West Elm Street
Suite 620
Conshohocken, PA  19428
+1 (610) 755-9786
www.principiapartners.com