Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-22 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
I just attached 2 alternative patches - "the-hard-way.patch" is similar to your patch but should fix the long param value problem the second patch is simpler in that it simply quotes all the values even if the value doesn't need to be quoted. Jeff On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 04:17 -0400, Michael B. Tr

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-22 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Did you try your patch with any really long file names? Jeff On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 04:17 -0400, Michael B. Trausch wrote: > On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 20:24 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > Fudging the linked list in camel is a gross hack (made worse by the > > fact that the MIME specification does

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-22 Thread Michael B. Trausch
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 20:24 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > Fudging the linked list in camel is a gross hack (made worse by the > fact that the MIME specification does not dictate that the name param > be last), this is why I suggested you do it in the composer by making > it set the name paramete

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-21 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
Fudging the linked list in camel is a gross hack (made worse by the fact that the MIME specification does not dictate that the name param be last), this is why I suggested you do it in the composer by making it set the name parameter last when constructing the headers. Jeff On Wed, 2008-05-21 at

[Evolution-hackers] Review a patch?

2008-05-21 Thread Michael B. Trausch
Some time ago, I submitted a patch to fix a bug in Evolution [1,2] that is a simple workaround for some types of broken servers that don't properly parse MIME header fields. The patch was rejected, however, I (still) do not understand why, and I would like to do so such that I can get this patch i