Message-ID's vs. Resent-Message-ID

[Tomi Ollila]

On Sun, Jan 10 2016, Erik Quaeghebeur <notmuch at equaeghe.nospammail.net> wrote:

> Thanks, Tomi, for your quick response.
>
>> > * If yes, for resent messages
>> > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2822#section-3.6.6), does notmuch use
>> > (the chronologically last) Resent-Message-ID, or the Message-ID?
>> 
>> the Message-ID
>
> Hmm. Is this a conscious decision, or is the resending case just not
> taken into account?

(most probably just) not taken into account

> What happens if I have both a message and my own copy of it after
> resending it to somebody else? I would like to have a record of whom I
> resent it to, as with forwarded messages (where the forwarded message
> does have a different message id).

Both of the copies are "files" of the same message; i.e.

notmuch search --output=files id:<Message-ID> will list both (all)
filenames

> Are the Resent-* headers of the resent message merged into the database
> entry? I guess this last question is more general: with multiple messages
> with the same Message-ID but differences (for whatever reason), how will
> these messages be merged in the database?

Database has fixed set of headers stored per message and (afaik) none
of the Resent-* headers are there (merged or separate).

(One thing to remember (for anyone perhaps planning to do something about
this) is that if we'd use Resent-Message-ID: as message identification 
if it exists, then Message-ID: of the message should act as In-Reply-To:
or References: -header...)

Tomi

> Best,
>
> Erik