Patches not shown (installation almost complete)

[David Demelier]

On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 16:41 +0100, Stephen Finucane wrote:
> Patchwork supports two ways of identifying what project a patch
> belongs to [1]:
> by providing a 'listid' value (only possible with the 'parsearchive'
> tool), or
> by extracting a suitable value for the header. In both cases, the
> provided/extracted listid value is compared against the values stored
> in the
> 'Project.listid' field [2].
> 
> For the latter case (extracting the value from headers), we check for
> three
> headers: 'List-ID', 'X-Mailing-List', or 'X-list' [3]. It doesn't do
> anything
> with the List-Post header. If any of these must be present in the
> mails, then
> their value must match one of the following regexes [4]:
> 
>   .*<([^>]+)>.*
> 
>   Any string inside a set of angle brackets. This can include words
> with
>   spaces.
> 
> or
> 
>   ^([\S]+)$
> 
>   Any string that doesn't include a space.
> 
> Based on the RFC that defines the List-Id header [4], it's expected
> that the
> header will "appear like a host name in a domain of the list owner"
> [5]. As
> such, Patchwork appears to be doing the correct thing here.
> Unfortunately, it
> also means that your header, 'Test Mailing List', is not acceptable
> as it is
> not surrounded by brackets and contains spaces. There are two courses
> of action
> here. You could change (or ask the list admin to change) the list ID
> to abide
> by that spec and update Patchwork's configuration accordingly. That
> would mean
> you'd probably use something like 'test.malikania.fr'. Alternatively,
> you could
> modify Patchwork to accept space in the List-ID header. This would
> mean
> converting the second regex to a catch-all/wildcard regex. It's worth
> pointing
> out that I don't like this option as its not spec compliant, and I
> would not be
> inclined to take this patch upstream. You'd have to carry this patch
> locally.
> 
> I'll be sure to add all of this information to the documentation for
> deployers
> who encounter this issue in the future. In any case, do let me know
> how you get
> on.

Thank you very much, that was the problem!

Kind regards for the very quick response!

Cheers,

-- 
David Demelier