Discourse email formatting test

The body of this email is in text/plain format,
includes consecurive dashes ( ----- ) and 4 backslashes ( \\\\ )
and also uses characters which are forbidden in html like those
used in <tags> and in &entities;

The reason I'm sending it is to verify the email formatting bug
reported in trac [1] is really fixed.

I'm also gpg-signing this email, just in case the gpg signature
stripping bug [2] was also fixed somehow.

I guess my email address will still be lost [3] upon hitting
Discourse topic watchers due to Discourse modifying the mail
but let's keep an eye on that too.

[1] #3073 (Discourse text/plain email use html entities, markdown and backslash-escapes for no reason) – OSGeo
[2] https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/3109
[3] #3072 (Discourse emails do not contain real sender email) – OSGeo

--strk;

  Libre GIS consultant/developer
  strk's services

Sandro Santilli wrote:

--DG962+RbJVV7Aw4t
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

The body of this email is in text/plain format,

[...]

.... but it is still multipart,

  Martin

On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 11:23:22AM -0000, Martin Spott wrote:

Sandro Santilli wrote:
>
> --DG962+RbJVV7Aw4t
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> The body of this email is in text/plain format,
[...]

.... but it is still multipart,

Which one ? From myself or from Discourse ?

Meanwhile this mail of yours to me from Mailman in great shape but
from Discourse with a very bad look:
https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/3073#comment:15

--strk;

On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 12:49:40PM +0100, Sandro Santilli wrote:

On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 11:23:22AM -0000, Martin Spott wrote:
> Sandro Santilli wrote:
> >
> > --DG962+RbJVV7Aw4t
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> >
> > The body of this email is in text/plain format,
> [...]
>
> .... but it is still multipart,

Which one ? From myself or from Discourse ?

I don't know if you received my questions, Martin,
I think the mail you referred to was multi-part due
to a GPG signature I've added. I'm not adding one
to this mail, which should then be just text/plain

--strk;

  Libre GIS consultant/developer
  strk's services

On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 at 19:25, Sandro Santilli <strk@kbt.io> wrote:

I don't know if you received my questions, Martin,
I think the mail you referred to was multi-part due
to a GPG signature I've added. I'm not adding one
to this mail, which should then be just text/plain

I'm receiving them as text/plain email, and mine should be also text/plain

--
ciao
Luca

www.lucadelu.org

[ intentionally sent to a single recipient being the SAC mailing list ]

On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 06:34:03AM +0100, Luca Delucchi wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 at 19:25, Sandro Santilli <strk@kbt.io> wrote:
>
> I don't know if you received my questions, Martin,
> I think the mail you referred to was multi-part due
> to a GPG signature I've added. I'm not adding one
> to this mail, which should then be just text/plain

I'm receiving them as text/plain email, and mine should be also text/plain

Thanks, I confirm your was received here (via Mailman) as text/plain
as well, and passing DKIM authentication results from my server:

  Authentication-Results: hst.kbt.io;
    dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected)
    header.d=gmail.com

But it seems it failed DMARC on another server due to the envelope-from
being @osgeo.org while the From was @gmail.com:

  Authentication-Results: spool.mail.gandi.net;
     dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM"
     header.from=gmail.com (policy=none);
     smtp.mailfrom="SRS0=oZp/=IY=lists.osgeo.org=sac-bounces@osgeo.org"
     spf=pass (spool.mail.gandi.net: domain of "SRS0=oZp/=IY=lists.osgeo.org=sac-bounces@osgeo.org" designates 140.211.15.3 as permitted sender)

--strk;

  Libre GIS consultant/developer
  strk's services