I wrote some code to try out non-hash reply subjects formatted as (replyto ), while keeping the ability to use the existing hash style.
I donât think we need to decide all at once. If clients add support for a new method then people can use it if they like. The downside of course is that this costs developer time, so I decided to invest a few hours of my own time into a proof of concept.
With apologies to @movq@www.uninformativ.de for corrupting jennyâs beautiful code. I donât write this expecting you to incorporate the patch, because it does complicate things and might not be a direction you want to go in. But if you like any part of this approach feel free to use bits of it; I release the patch under jennyâs current LICENCE.
Supporting both kinds of reply in jenny was complicated because each email can only have one Message-Id, and because itâs possible the target twt will not be seen until after the twt referencing it. The following patch uses an sqlite database to keep track of known (url, timestamp) pairs, as well as a separate table of (url, timestamp) pairs that havenât been seen yet but are wanted. When one of those âwantedâ twts is finally seen, the mail file gets rewritten to include the appropriate In-Reply-To header.
Patch based on jenny commit 73a5ea81.
https://www.falsifian.org/a/oDtr/patch0.txt
Not implemented:
- Composing twts using the (replyto âŠ) format.
- Probably other important things Iâm forgetting.