[Remail] [RFC/RFT patch 0/2] remail: Improve original 'From:' mangling

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Tue, Jun 13 2023 at 14:05, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 12:48 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix.de> wrote:
>>
>> So the result looks like this:
>>
>>  From: Thomas Gleixner via speck <speck at linutronix.de>
>
> Thanks, that looks a lot more readable.
>
> I can't comment on the patches themselves, since I can't tell a python
> from a garter snake.

Ask me to review perl patches :)

> I do think that clearly some people have badly set up email clients
> for this all (just going by the number of emails that don't have
> proper threading, and that have subject lines that are just "..."),
> which makes me wonder if they have proper names in the original email.
> Maybe, maybe not.

That's gurgle playing silly buggers:

In-Reply-To: <6481ff8d.9d0a0220.a16c.249fSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN at mx.google.com>
References: <6481ff8d.9d0a0220.a16c.249fSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN at mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <20230608175817.2z77krwv5ce534he at treble>

> I'm guessing the real name could come from whatever key was used to
> encrypt the email.  Trying to decode the python, I think that
> gpg_sender_info().get_info() function does basically do most of this.

Actually it takes it from the original 'From:' header entry, which
should be ok in most cases except for those where people have to use a
special setup to send encrypted mail. Those tend(ed) to cause the empty
name case, which led to the current situation due to stupid me, because
they did not bother to set that up correctly and ended up with the bare
email address.

Thanks,

        tglx