Done, Please feel free to update the issues https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-210 as I did not want to invent my own terminology for this bug. BTW When can I expect 0.7.2 to be released? Fix of this issue is quite important for me.
Regards, Lukas On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 14:44 +0100, Lukáš Vlček wrote: > > Hi, > > > > is it ok if I point the JIRA issue to my github repo for references? Or > do > > you want me to implement use case directly in mime4j? (I can do that, it > > will just take longer :-) > > > > The problem is quite trivial to reproduce. So, makes no big difference > to me. > > Oleg > > > > Thanks, > > Lukas > > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 10:46 +0100, Lukáš Vlček wrote: > > > > Hi Oleg, > > > > > > > > Thanks for reply. I would love to open JIRA tickets, but I am still > not > > > > sure that I use Mime4J API correctly. So I prepared a simple test > case > > > and > > > > uploaded to GitHub. > > > > It contains some tests to demonstrate mentioned issues: > > > > > > > > Specifically, the following two tests are about encoding of "From" > field. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/lukas-vlcek/mime4j-test/blob/master/src/test/java/org/mime4j/test/BasicTest.java#L20 > > > > and > > > > > > > > https://github.com/lukas-vlcek/mime4j-test/blob/master/src/test/java/org/mime4j/test/BasicTest.java#L28 > > > > > > > > Do you think you can take a look at this and tell me if I use Mime4J > API > > > > correctly, if so then I will be happy to go and open JIRA tickets. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Lukas > > > > > > > > > > I can confirm this issue is caused by a regression in mime4j 0.7.x. > > > Basically the lenient address parser does not decode encoded display > > > names at all. Please raise a JIRA for this regression. > > > > > > Oleg > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 16:50 +0100, Lukáš Vlček wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, thanks for this library! > > > > > > > > > > > > I am new to this list, but I have been using mime4j for some > time now > > > > > (but > > > > > > I would not call myself an expert on it though). > > > > > > > > > > > > I switched from 0.6 to 0.7.1 recently and my tests started to > fail in > > > > > some > > > > > > cases: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Parsing address: > > > > > > > > > > > > I have this in the mail header: > > > > > > From: "=?utf-8?B?amlhY2NAZ2lsbGlvbi5jb20uY24=?=" < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > in 0.6 I was able to have it parsed into: "[email protected]< > > > > > > [email protected]>" > > > > > > I am unable to get the same result with 0.7.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > Another similar example is: > > > > > > From: =?GBK?B?x67T7rrn?= <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > in 0.6 it was giving me: "钱宇虹 <[email protected]>" > > > > > > in 0.7.1 I can not get it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) CRLF instead of LF > > > > > > > > > > > > In body texts I am getting CRLF (\r\n) where I was getting LF > (\n) > > > with > > > > > 0.6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > More generally, is there anything in particular I should pay > > > attention to > > > > > > when switching from 0.6 to 0.7.1 ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Lukas > > > > > > > > > > Lukas > > > > > > > > > > If you are reasonably sure mime4j does not correctly parse certain > MIME > > > > > messages please open raise a JIRA for each case separately and > provide > > > a > > > > > sample message in binary format (as an attachment) and a test case > > > > > reproducing the issue. > > > > > > > > > > Oleg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
