[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Derek Chen-Becker]

Actually, I thought that Dumbster was more sophisticated than it is. I think
that your approach is fine for verifying that the message is created
properly.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> What's the advantage/purpose over they method I chose?
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
> wrote:
>
>> Have you ever used Dumbster?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Derek Chen-Becker > > wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to see an integrated dumbster test. You can pick an
>>> arbitrary port to run the test on just by attempting to bind and iterating
>>> until you succeed. Something (roughly) like this:
>>>
>>> def openSmtpServer (startPort : Int, endPort : Int) :
>>> (Int,SimpleSmtpServer) = {
>>>   var port = startPort
>>>   var server : SimpleSmtpServer = null
>>>
>>>   while (port <= endPort && (server eq null)) {
>>> try {
>>>   server = SimpleSmtpServer.start(port)
>>> } catch {
>>>   case _ => port += 1
>>> }
>>>   }
>>>   return (port,server)
>>> }
>>>
>>> Then you can configure Lift's mailer to send to that port on localhost
>>> and go from there.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> > wrote:
>>>
 Can someone confirm or give other feedback? Are my tests good?
 http://reviewboard.liftweb.net/r/83/



 On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >>> > wrote:

> Okay. Unit test are now on Review Board too (and they pass).
> I'm hoping someone will be able to confirm my work so that my client, a
> medical assistance volunteer-based charity organization, will have email
> working properly along with the rest of Lift's great features, so that the
> volunteer dispatchers will be able to click the links and help sick 
> people.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I thought of a smarter way to test it. Please tell me if you have any
>> objections.
>> I noticed that some of the specs extend the class they test. The idea
>> is to refactor the call to actually send the email into an outside 
>> method.
>> Then, after making some private members of Mailer protected, the spec can
>> override the behavior of the method that sends it, to instead check the
>> message object.
>> This has the advantages of not adding another dependency to Lift, or
>> relying on a given port being available to run an SMTP server on whoever
>> builds Lift's computer.
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
>> > charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
>> > XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
>> > Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
>> >
>>
>> Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise
>> engage
>> on this subject.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > -
>> > David Pollak wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > >wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that
>> simple
>> > > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are
>> multipart?
>> >
>> >
>> > Both.
>> >
>> > Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all
>> other mail
>> > is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the
>> system.
>> > It's 2 or 3 tests.
>> >
>> > Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses
>> Lift
>> > uses
>> > the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these
>> sites with
>> > the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a
>> problem,
>> > please
>> > call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something
>> goes
>> > wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this
>> apparently
>> > simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the
>> tests.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > Or something else?
>> > >
>> > > -
>> > > David Pollak wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > > >wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test
>> email, or
>> > > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
>> > computers
>> > > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you'

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

What's the advantage/purpose over they method I chose?

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> Have you ever used Dumbster?
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Derek Chen-Becker 
> wrote:
>
>> I would like to see an integrated dumbster test. You can pick an arbitrary
>> port to run the test on just by attempting to bind and iterating until you
>> succeed. Something (roughly) like this:
>>
>> def openSmtpServer (startPort : Int, endPort : Int) :
>> (Int,SimpleSmtpServer) = {
>>   var port = startPort
>>   var server : SimpleSmtpServer = null
>>
>>   while (port <= endPort && (server eq null)) {
>> try {
>>   server = SimpleSmtpServer.start(port)
>> } catch {
>>   case _ => port += 1
>> }
>>   }
>>   return (port,server)
>> }
>>
>> Then you can configure Lift's mailer to send to that port on localhost and
>> go from there.
>>
>> Derek
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Can someone confirm or give other feedback? Are my tests good?
>>> http://reviewboard.liftweb.net/r/83/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Okay. Unit test are now on Review Board too (and they pass).
 I'm hoping someone will be able to confirm my work so that my client, a
 medical assistance volunteer-based charity organization, will have email
 working properly along with the rest of Lift's great features, so that the
 volunteer dispatchers will be able to click the links and help sick people.


 On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim >>> > wrote:

> I thought of a smarter way to test it. Please tell me if you have any
> objections.
> I noticed that some of the specs extend the class they test. The idea
> is to refactor the call to actually send the email into an outside method.
> Then, after making some private members of Mailer protected, the spec can
> override the behavior of the method that sends it, to instead check the
> message object.
> This has the advantages of not adding another dependency to Lift, or
> relying on a given port being available to run an SMTP server on whoever
> builds Lift's computer.
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >
> > I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
> > charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
> > XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
> > Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
> >
>
> Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise
> engage
> on this subject.
>
>
> >
> > -
> > David Pollak wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that
> simple
> > > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are
> multipart?
> >
> >
> > Both.
> >
> > Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other
> mail
> > is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the
> system.
> > It's 2 or 3 tests.
> >
> > Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses
> Lift
> > uses
> > the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites
> with
> > the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
> > please
> > call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something
> goes
> > wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this
> apparently
> > simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the
> tests.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Or something else?
> > >
> > > -
> > > David Pollak wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test
> email, or
> > > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
> > computers
> > > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one
> that
> > > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no
> more
> > > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do
> the
> > > work.
> > >
> > >
> > > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and
> it
> > > works
> > > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> > > >
>

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Have you ever used Dumbster?

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Derek Chen-Becker wrote:

> I would like to see an integrated dumbster test. You can pick an arbitrary
> port to run the test on just by attempting to bind and iterating until you
> succeed. Something (roughly) like this:
>
> def openSmtpServer (startPort : Int, endPort : Int) :
> (Int,SimpleSmtpServer) = {
>   var port = startPort
>   var server : SimpleSmtpServer = null
>
>   while (port <= endPort && (server eq null)) {
> try {
>   server = SimpleSmtpServer.start(port)
> } catch {
>   case _ => port += 1
> }
>   }
>   return (port,server)
> }
>
> Then you can configure Lift's mailer to send to that port on localhost and
> go from there.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
> wrote:
>
>> Can someone confirm or give other feedback? Are my tests good?
>> http://reviewboard.liftweb.net/r/83/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay. Unit test are now on Review Board too (and they pass).
>>> I'm hoping someone will be able to confirm my work so that my client, a
>>> medical assistance volunteer-based charity organization, will have email
>>> working properly along with the rest of Lift's great features, so that the
>>> volunteer dispatchers will be able to click the links and help sick people.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I thought of a smarter way to test it. Please tell me if you have any
 objections.
 I noticed that some of the specs extend the class they test. The idea is
 to refactor the call to actually send the email into an outside method.
 Then, after making some private members of Mailer protected, the spec can
 override the behavior of the method that sends it, to instead check the
 message object.
 This has the advantages of not adding another dependency to Lift, or
 relying on a given port being available to run an SMTP server on whoever
 builds Lift's computer.

 -
 David Pollak wrote:

 On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >>> >wrote:

 >
 > I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
 > charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
 > XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
 > Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
 >

 Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise
 engage
 on this subject.


 >
 > -
 > David Pollak wrote:
 >
 > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com
 > >wrote:
 >
 > >
 > > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
 > > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are
 multipart?
 >
 >
 > Both.
 >
 > Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other
 mail
 > is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the
 system.
 > It's 2 or 3 tests.
 >
 > Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses
 Lift
 > uses
 > the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites
 with
 > the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
 > please
 > call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something
 goes
 > wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this
 apparently
 > simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the
 tests.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > > Or something else?
 > >
 > > -
 > > David Pollak wrote:
 > >
 > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com
 > > >wrote:
 > >
 > > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test
 email, or
 > > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
 > computers
 > > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
 > >
 > >
 > > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one
 that
 > > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no
 more
 > > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do
 the
 > > work.
 > >
 > >
 > > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and
 it
 > > works
 > > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
 > > >
 > >
 > > If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
 > > people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long
 time
 > > (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for
 accepting
 > this
 > > change is to have a test as

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Derek Chen-Becker]

I would like to see an integrated dumbster test. You can pick an arbitrary
port to run the test on just by attempting to bind and iterating until you
succeed. Something (roughly) like this:

def openSmtpServer (startPort : Int, endPort : Int) : (Int,SimpleSmtpServer)
= {
  var port = startPort
  var server : SimpleSmtpServer = null

  while (port <= endPort && (server eq null)) {
try {
  server = SimpleSmtpServer.start(port)
} catch {
  case _ => port += 1
}
  }
  return (port,server)
}

Then you can configure Lift's mailer to send to that port on localhost and
go from there.

Derek

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> Can someone confirm or give other feedback? Are my tests good?
> http://reviewboard.liftweb.net/r/83/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:
>
>> Okay. Unit test are now on Review Board too (and they pass).
>> I'm hoping someone will be able to confirm my work so that my client, a
>> medical assistance volunteer-based charity organization, will have email
>> working properly along with the rest of Lift's great features, so that the
>> volunteer dispatchers will be able to click the links and help sick people.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I thought of a smarter way to test it. Please tell me if you have any
>>> objections.
>>> I noticed that some of the specs extend the class they test. The idea is
>>> to refactor the call to actually send the email into an outside method.
>>> Then, after making some private members of Mailer protected, the spec can
>>> override the behavior of the method that sends it, to instead check the
>>> message object.
>>> This has the advantages of not adding another dependency to Lift, or
>>> relying on a given port being available to run an SMTP server on whoever
>>> builds Lift's computer.
>>>
>>> -
>>> David Pollak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> >wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
>>> > charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
>>> > XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
>>> > Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise
>>> engage
>>> on this subject.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> > David Pollak wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > >wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
>>> > > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are
>>> multipart?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Both.
>>> >
>>> > Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other
>>> mail
>>> > is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the
>>> system.
>>> > It's 2 or 3 tests.
>>> >
>>> > Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift
>>> > uses
>>> > the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites
>>> with
>>> > the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
>>> > please
>>> > call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
>>> > wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
>>> > simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > Or something else?
>>> > >
>>> > > -
>>> > > David Pollak wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > > >wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test
>>> email, or
>>> > > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
>>> > computers
>>> > > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one
>>> that
>>> > > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no
>>> more
>>> > > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do
>>> the
>>> > > work.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and
>>> it
>>> > > works
>>> > > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > > If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
>>> > > people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long
>>> time
>>> > > (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting
>>> > this
>>> > > change is to have a test associated with it.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
>>> > > > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> > naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > 

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Okay. Unit test are now on Review Board too (and they pass).
I'm hoping someone will be able to confirm my work so that my client, a
medical assistance volunteer-based charity organization, will have email
working properly along with the rest of Lift's great features, so that the
volunteer dispatchers will be able to click the links and help sick people.


On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> I thought of a smarter way to test it. Please tell me if you have any
> objections.
> I noticed that some of the specs extend the class they test. The idea is to
> refactor the call to actually send the email into an outside method. Then,
> after making some private members of Mailer protected, the spec can override
> the behavior of the method that sends it, to instead check the message
> object.
> This has the advantages of not adding another dependency to Lift, or
> relying on a given port being available to run an SMTP server on whoever
> builds Lift's computer.
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> >
> > I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
> > charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
> > XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
> > Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
> >
>
> Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise engage
> on this subject.
>
>
> >
> > -
> > David Pollak wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> > > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?
> >
> >
> > Both.
> >
> > Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other
> mail
> > is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
> > It's 2 or 3 tests.
> >
> > Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift
> > uses
> > the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites
> with
> > the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
> > please
> > call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
> > wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
> > simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Or something else?
> > >
> > > -
> > > David Pollak wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email,
> or
> > > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
> > computers
> > > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one
> that
> > > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no
> more
> > > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> > > work.
> > >
> > >
> > > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> > > works
> > > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> > > >
> > >
> > > If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> > > people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> > > (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting
> > this
> > > change is to have a test associated with it.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > > > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Did you write a test?
> > > >>
> > > >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> > > master
> > > >> until Thursday.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > > >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > >  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> > > won't
> > >  indent properly)
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> > >  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> > > looking
> > > > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line
> > 156.
> > > There
> > > > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> > > List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > > > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> > > message.setText on
> > > > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> > > >
> > > > Derek
> > > >>

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

I thought of a smarter way to test it. Please tell me if you have any 
objections.
I noticed that some of the specs extend the class they test. The idea is to 
refactor the call to actually send the email into an outside method. Then, 
after making some private members of Mailer protected, the spec can override 
the behavior of the method that sends it, to instead check the message object.
This has the advantages of not adding another dependency to Lift, or relying on 
a given port being available to run an SMTP server on whoever builds Lift's 
computer.

-
David Pollak wrote:

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
> charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
> XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
> Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
>

Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise engage
on this subject.


>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> >
> > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?
>
>
> Both.
>
> Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other mail
> is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
> It's 2 or 3 tests.
>
> Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift
> uses
> the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites with
> the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
> please
> call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
> wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
> simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.
>
>
>
>
> > Or something else?
> >
> > -
> > David Pollak wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  > >wrote:
> >
> > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
> computers
> > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
> >
> >
> > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
> > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
> > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> > work.
> >
> >
> > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> > works
> > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> > >
> >
> > If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> > people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> > (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting
> this
> > change is to have a test associated with it.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Did you write a test?
> > >>
> > >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> > master
> > >> until Thursday.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> > won't
> >  indent properly)
> > 
> > 
> >  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> > looking
> > > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line
> 156.
> > There
> > > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> > List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> > message.setText on
> > > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> > >
> > > Derek
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> > >> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> > >> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do
> the
> > >>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a
> > sequence of
> > >>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone
> wants
> > to open
> > >>> an issue on it I could make the change

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Let's say I write a test using dumbster. What port will it run on?

-
David Pollak wrote:

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?


Both.

Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other mail
is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
It's 2 or 3 tests.

Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift uses
the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites with
the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem, please
call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.




> Or something else?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on computers
> > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
>
>
> I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
> made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
> about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> work.
>
>
> > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> works
> > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> >
>
> If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting this
> change is to have a test associated with it.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> >>
> >>
> >> Did you write a test?
> >>
> >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> master
> >> until Thursday.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> won't
>  indent properly)
> 
> 
>  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> looking
> > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156.
> There
> > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> message.setText on
> > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> >> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
> >>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a
> sequence of
> >>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants
> to open
> >>> an issue on it I could make the change.
> >>>
> >>> Derek
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> >>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>  text-only messages and there was some complaint about that...
> sigh.
> 
> 
>  On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
> > non-multipart messages. I suppose that this could be refactored
> to support
> > single part MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing
> that a
> > BlackBerry can't handle it.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not
> super
> >> confident I'll find such specs.
> >> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
> >>
> >> -
> >> David Pollak wr

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or what
content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on computers that
don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it works
fine. Do most commits include a unit test?


On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:
>
>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
>
>
> Did you write a test?
>
> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into master
> until Thursday.
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim > > wrote:
>>
>>> How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it won't
>>> indent properly)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking
 at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
 should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), and
 if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
 the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.

 Derek


 On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence 
>> of
>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to 
>> open
>> an issue on it I could make the change.
>>
>> Derek
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>>> text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
 non-multipart messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to 
 support
 single part MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a
 BlackBerry can't handle it.

 Derek


 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
> confident I'll find such specs.
> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >
> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
> >
>
> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original
> message.
>
> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
> convert
> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>
>
> >
> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Return-Path: 
> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
> [174.143.236.122])
> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess
> record
> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56
> -0400 (EDT)
> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
> charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
> XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
> Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
>

Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise engage
on this subject.


>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> >
> > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?
>
>
> Both.
>
> Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other mail
> is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
> It's 2 or 3 tests.
>
> Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift
> uses
> the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites with
> the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
> please
> call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
> wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
> simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.
>
>
>
>
> > Or something else?
> >
> > -
> > David Pollak wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  > >wrote:
> >
> > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
> computers
> > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
> >
> >
> > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
> > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
> > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> > work.
> >
> >
> > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> > works
> > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> > >
> >
> > If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> > people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> > (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting
> this
> > change is to have a test associated with it.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Did you write a test?
> > >>
> > >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> > master
> > >> until Thursday.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> > won't
> >  indent properly)
> > 
> > 
> >  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> > looking
> > > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line
> 156.
> > There
> > > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> > List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> > message.setText on
> > > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> > >
> > > Derek
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> > >> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> > >> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do
> the
> > >>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a
> > sequence of
> > >>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone
> wants
> > to open
> > >>> an issue on it I could make the change.
> > >>>
> > >>> Derek
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> > >>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally
> did
> >  text-only messages and there was some complaint about that...
> > sigh.
> > 
> > 
> >  On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
> > > non-multipart messages. I suppose that this c

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain; 
charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an 
XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?

-
David Pollak wrote:

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?


Both.

Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other mail
is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
It's 2 or 3 tests.

Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift uses
the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites with
the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem, please
call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.




> Or something else?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on computers
> > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
>
>
> I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
> made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
> about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> work.
>
>
> > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> works
> > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> >
>
> If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting this
> change is to have a test associated with it.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> >>
> >>
> >> Did you write a test?
> >>
> >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> master
> >> until Thursday.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> won't
>  indent properly)
> 
> 
>  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> looking
> > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156.
> There
> > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> message.setText on
> > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> >> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
> >>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a
> sequence of
> >>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants
> to open
> >>> an issue on it I could make the change.
> >>>
> >>> Derek
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> >>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>  text-only messages and there was some complaint about that...
> sigh.
> 
> 
>  On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
> > non-multipart messages. I suppose that this could be refactored
> to support
> > single part MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing
> that a
> > BlackBerry can't handle it.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not
> super
> >> confident I'll find such specs.

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?


Both.

Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other mail
is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
It's 2 or 3 tests.

Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift uses
the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites with
the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem, please
call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.




> Or something else?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on computers
> > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
>
>
> I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
> made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
> about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> work.
>
>
> > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> works
> > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> >
>
> If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting this
> change is to have a test associated with it.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> >>
> >>
> >> Did you write a test?
> >>
> >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> master
> >> until Thursday.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> won't
>  indent properly)
> 
> 
>  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> looking
> > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156.
> There
> > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> message.setText on
> > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> >> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
> >>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a
> sequence of
> >>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants
> to open
> >>> an issue on it I could make the change.
> >>>
> >>> Derek
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> >>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>  text-only messages and there was some complaint about that...
> sigh.
> 
> 
>  On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
> > non-multipart messages. I suppose that this could be refactored
> to support
> > single part MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing
> that a
> > BlackBerry can't handle it.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not
> super
> >> confident I'll find such specs.
> >> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
> >>
> >> -
> >> David Pollak wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> >> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

So then can you answer my last question? What is a safe port to run Dumbster on?

-
David Pollak wrote:

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> I verified locally via dumbster that the content type is test/plain;
> charset=us-ascii for a single PlainMailBodyType. For two, or an
> XHTMLMailBodyType, it's multipart/alternative.
> Do I still need to contribute a test to Lift?
>

Yes.  This is the last time I will state this criteria or otherwise engage
on this subject.


>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> >
> > Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple
> > messages are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart?
>
>
> Both.
>
> Test that mail sent as plain text is not multipart and that all other mail
> is multipart and that all the mail actually makes it through the system.
> It's 2 or 3 tests.
>
> Why am I imposing this burden on you?  Almost every site that uses Lift
> uses
> the Mailer.  I have given my cell phone number to some of these sites with
> the message "I stand behind Lift... if you're experiencing a problem,
> please
> call me any time day or night."   So, I'm on the hook if something goes
> wrong.  My gut says, "there could be more problems with this apparently
> simple change than meet the eye," so I'm asking you to write the tests.
>
>
>
>
> > Or something else?
> >
> > -
> > David Pollak wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  > >wrote:
> >
> > > I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> > > what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on
> computers
> > > that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?
> >
> >
> > I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
> > made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
> > about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
> > work.
> >
> >
> > > As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it
> > works
> > > fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
> > >
> >
> > If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
> > people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
> > (except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting
> this
> > change is to have a test associated with it.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> > > feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Did you write a test?
> > >>
> > >> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into
> > master
> > >> until Thursday.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > >>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it
> > won't
> >  indent properly)
> > 
> > 
> >  On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind
> > looking
> > > at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line
> 156.
> > There
> > > should be a check or match to see if info is a
> > List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> > > if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a
> > message.setText on
> > > the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
> > >
> > > Derek
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> > > naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> > >> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> > >> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do
> the
> > >>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a
> > sequence of
> > >>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone
> wants
> > to open
> > >>> an issue on it I could make the change.
> > >>>
> > >>> Derek
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> > >>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally
> did
> >  text-only messages and there was some complaint about that...
> > sigh.
> > 
> > 
> >  On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> >  dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Wait a minute. You want me to test that my change works--that simple messages 
are not multipart--or that other messages still are multipart? Or something 
else?

-
David Pollak wrote:

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on computers
> that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?


I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
work.


> As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it works
> fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
>

If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
(except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting this
change is to have a test associated with it.


>
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
>>
>>
>> Did you write a test?
>>
>> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into master
>> until Thursday.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it won't
 indent properly)


 On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
 dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking
> at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
> should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), 
> and
> if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
> the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
>> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
>>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a 
>>> sequence of
>>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to 
>>> open
>>> an issue on it I could make the change.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
>>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
 text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.


 On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
 dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
> non-multipart messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to 
> support
> single part MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a
> BlackBerry can't handle it.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
>> confident I'll find such specs.
>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>> >
>>
>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original
>> message.
>>
>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
>> convert
>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
>> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Return-Path: 
>> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>> [174.143.236.122])
>> >by mx.g

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> I asked you how to write one. I have no clue how to unit test email, or
> what content type an email is. And the test has to not fail on computers
> that don't have an SMTP server, I presume?


I don't know how to write tests against mailers, but you're the one that
made a change, so you have to figure out how to test it.  I know no more
about testing mailers than you do, so it's one of us that has to do the
work.


> As I mentioned on review board, I did test it manually though and it works
> fine. Do most commits include a unit test?
>

If this change breaks the mailer, the break impacts lots and lots of
people.  The mailer code has been stable and untouched for a long time
(except for the change to LiftActors).  So, my criteria for accepting this
change is to have a test associated with it.


>
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM, David Pollak <
> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?
>>
>>
>> Did you write a test?
>>
>> Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into master
>> until Thursday.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it won't
 indent properly)


 On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
 dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking
> at it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
> should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), 
> and
> if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
> the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
>> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
>>> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a 
>>> sequence of
>>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to 
>>> open
>>> an issue on it I could make the change.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
>>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
 text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.


 On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
 dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending
> non-multipart messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to 
> support
> single part MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a
> BlackBerry can't handle it.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
>> confident I'll find such specs.
>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>> >
>>
>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original
>> message.
>>
>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
>> convert
>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
>> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Return-Path: 
>> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>> [174.143.236.122])
>> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>> > p

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?


Did you write a test?

Also, it's not going into M7, so it's not going to get merged into master
until Thursday.


>
>
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
> wrote:
>
>> How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it won't
>> indent properly)
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker > > wrote:
>>
>>> Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking at
>>> it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
>>> should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), and
>>> if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
>>> the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> > wrote:
>>>
 I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
 http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110


 On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
 dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the
> right thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence 
> of
> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to open
> an issue on it I could make the change.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>> text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
>>> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
>>> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry 
>>> can't
>>> handle it.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>

 True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
 confident I'll find such specs.
 What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?

 -
 David Pollak wrote:

 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:

 >
 > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
 >

 GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.

 You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
 convert
 messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.


 >
 > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
 > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
 >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
 > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
 a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
 >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
 > Return-Path: 
 > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
 [174.143.236.122])
 >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
 > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
 >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
 > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
 > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
 > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
 > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
 > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess
 record
 > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
 > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
 >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56
 -0400 (EDT)
 > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
 > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
 > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
 > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
 > MIME-Version: 1.0
 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
 > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
 >
 > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 >
 > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
 > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
 > Request URL: [TODO]
 > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
 >
>>

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Can someone look at Review Board? Is my addition okay?

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it won't
> indent properly)
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker 
> wrote:
>
>> Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking at
>> it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
>> should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), and
>> if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
>> the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
>>
>> Derek
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
>>> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the right
 thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence of
 MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to open
 an issue on it I could make the change.

 Derek


 On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
 feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
> text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
>> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
>> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry 
>> can't
>> handle it.
>>
>> Derek
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
>>> confident I'll find such specs.
>>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>>
>>> -
>>> David Pollak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>>> >
>>>
>>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>>>
>>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
>>> convert
>>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>>> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
>>> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > Return-Path: 
>>> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>>> [174.143.236.122])
>>> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>>> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>>> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
>>> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
>>> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>>> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess
>>> record
>>> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>>> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
>>> (EDT)
>>> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
>>> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
>>> > MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
>>> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>>> >
>>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
>>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>> >
>>> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
>>> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
>>> > Request URL: [TODO]
>>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>>> >  wrote:
>>> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
>>> > Thunderbird.
>>> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really
>>> plain
>>> > text?
>>> > >  What do the he

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

How does this look? (Note: output from git diff -b, so applying it won't
indent properly)


On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Derek Chen-Becker wrote:

> Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking at
> it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
> should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), and
> if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
> the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
> wrote:
>
>> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
>> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker > > wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the right
>>> thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence of
>>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to open
>>> an issue on it I could make the change.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
>>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
 text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.


 On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
 dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
> handle it.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
>> confident I'll find such specs.
>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>> >
>>
>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>>
>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
>> convert
>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
>> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Return-Path: 
>> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>> [174.143.236.122])
>> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
>> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
>> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
>> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
>> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
>> (EDT)
>> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
>> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
>> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
>> > MIME-Version: 1.0
>> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
>> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>> >
>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> >
>> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
>> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
>> > Request URL: [TODO]
>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>> >  wrote:
>> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
>> > Thunderbird.
>> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really
>> plain
>> > text?
>> > >  What do the headers say it is?
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a
>> URL.
>> > >> Normally when a BlackBerry

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Derek Chen-Becker]

Probably not until next week, unfortunately. If you don't mind looking at
it, the main thing to change is in Mailer.scala, around line 156. There
should be a check or match to see if info is a List(PlainMailBodyType), and
if so, skip the Multipart mapping that follows and do a message.setText on
the contents of the PlainMailBodyType instead.

Derek

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

> I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
> http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker 
> wrote:
>
>> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the right
>> thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence of
>> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to open
>> an issue on it I could make the change.
>>
>> Derek
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
>> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>>> text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
 messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
 MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
 handle it.

 Derek


 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
> confident I'll find such specs.
> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >
> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
> >
>
> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>
> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
> convert
> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>
>
> >
> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Return-Path: 
> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
> [174.143.236.122])
> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
> (EDT)
> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> > Request URL: [TODO]
> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
> >  wrote:
> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
> > Thunderbird.
> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really
> plain
> > text?
> > >  What do the headers say it is?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a
> URL.
> > >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> > >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For
> some
> > >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is
> it
> > >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I
> solve
>>>

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

I guess you didn't get around to it yet. Any idea when? Thanks.
http://github.com/dpp/liftweb/issues/#issue/110


On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Derek Chen-Becker wrote:

> Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the right
> thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence of
> MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to open
> an issue on it I could make the change.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak <
> feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did
>> text-only messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker <
>> dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
>>> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
>>> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
>>> handle it.
>>>
>>> Derek
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> > wrote:
>>>

 True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
 confident I'll find such specs.
 What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?

 -
 David Pollak wrote:

 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote:

 >
 > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
 >

 GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.

 You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
 convert
 messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.


 >
 > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
 > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
 >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
 > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
 a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
 >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
 > Return-Path: 
 > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
 [174.143.236.122])
 >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
 > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
 >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
 > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
 > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
 > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
 > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
 > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
 > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
 > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
 >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
 (EDT)
 > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
 > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
 > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
 > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
 > MIME-Version: 1.0
 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
 > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
 >
 > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 >
 > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
 > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
 > Request URL: [TODO]
 > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
 >
 >
 > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
 >  wrote:
 > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
 > Thunderbird.
 > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really
 plain
 > text?
 > >  What do the headers say it is?
 > >
 > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
 naftoli...@gmail.com
 > >
 > > wrote:
 > >>
 > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a
 URL.
 > >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
 > >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
 > >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
 > >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
 > >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients
 may
 > >> not be able to view it.
 > >> Thanks.
 > >>
 > >>
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > --
 > > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
 > > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
 > > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
 > > Surf the harmonics
 > >
 > > >
 > >
 >
 > >
 >


 --
 Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
 Beginning Scala http://www.apress.c

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Yes, sure. Most smartphones do, I believe.
Now my client informed me as follows. When he receives this message the email 
view has an option to switch between HTML view and plain text view. When he 
switches to plain text it does hyperlink the URL. However if I send say an SMS 
to his email address there's no such choice; it knows it's plain text.
So I'm guessing that it's a bug on RIM's part, that multipart messages default 
to HTML view even if they're plain text. This is on a brand new BlackBerry 
(5.0). So as a workaround it would be great if Lift would support non-multipart.
Thanks.


-
Ross Mellgren wrote:


Do you have evidence that it ever will auto-highlight URLs in plain  
text emails? E.g. some email from your client?

-Ross

On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> It isn't not handling the message, it's just not automatically  
> hyperlinking the URL.
> Any other ideas?
> Thanks.
>
> -
> Derek Chen-Becker wrote:
>
> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single  
> part
> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry  
> can't
> handle it.
>
> Derek
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
>>
>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super  
>> confident
>> I'll find such specs.
>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>>>
>>
>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>>
>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to  
>> convert
>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>>>   Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb. 
>>> 29.1254943736364;
>>>   Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Return-Path: 
>>> Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>> [174.143.236.122])
>>>   by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>>> 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>>>   Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>>> permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
>>> yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
>>> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>>> 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
>>> for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>>   by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>>>   for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400  
>>> (EDT)
>>> From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
>>> Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>>   boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
>>> Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>>>
>>> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>
>>> naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
>>> ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
>>> Request URL: [TODO]
>>> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>>>  wrote:
 Please send some test email to an account you can access using
>>> Thunderbird.
 Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really  
 plain
>>> text?
 What do the headers say it is?

 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com

 wrote:
>
> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a  
> URL.
> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For  
> some
> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is  
> it
> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I  
> solve
> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients  
> may
> not be able to view it.
> Thanks.
>
>



 --
 Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
 Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
 Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
 Surf the harmonics

>

>>>

>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>> Surf the harm

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Derek Chen-Becker]

If you really want, you could send me a private message with your email
address and I can send you a message that I'm absolutely sure is plain text
so that you could verify.

Derek

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Ross Mellgren  wrote:

>
> Do you have evidence that it ever will auto-highlight URLs in plain
> text emails? E.g. some email from your client?
>
> -Ross
>
> On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:
>
> >
> > It isn't not handling the message, it's just not automatically
> > hyperlinking the URL.
> > Any other ideas?
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -
> > Derek Chen-Becker wrote:
> >
> > The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
> > messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single
> > part
> > MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry
> > can't
> > handle it.
> >
> > Derek
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  > >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
> >> confident
> >> I'll find such specs.
> >> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
> >>
> >> -
> >> David Pollak wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
> >>>
> >>
> >> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
> >>
> >> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to
> >> convert
> >> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> >>> Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
> >>>   Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> >>> Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.
> >>> 29.1254943736364;
> >>>   Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> >>> Return-Path: 
> >>> Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
> >> [174.143.236.122])
> >>>   by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> >>> 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
> >>>   Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> >>> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> >>> permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> >>> yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> >>> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> >>> 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> >>> for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> >>> Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> >>>   by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
> >>>   for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
> >>> (EDT)
> >>> From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> >>> To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> >>> Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> >>> Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> >>> MIME-Version: 1.0
> >>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >>>   boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> >>> Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> >>>
> >>> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >>>
> >>> naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> >>> ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> >>> Request URL: [TODO]
> >>> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
> >>>  wrote:
>  Please send some test email to an account you can access using
> >>> Thunderbird.
>  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really
>  plain
> >>> text?
>  What do the headers say it is?
> 
>  On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> >> naftoli...@gmail.com
> 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a
> > URL.
> > Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> > automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For
> > some
> > reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is
> > it
> > possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I
> > solve
> > this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients
> > may
> > not be able to view it.
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
>  --
>  Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>  Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>  Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>  Surf the harmonics
> 
> >
> 
> >>>
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> >> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> >> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> >> Surf the harmonics
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > >
>
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this mess

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Ross Mellgren]

Do you have evidence that it ever will auto-highlight URLs in plain  
text emails? E.g. some email from your client?

-Ross

On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> It isn't not handling the message, it's just not automatically  
> hyperlinking the URL.
> Any other ideas?
> Thanks.
>
> -
> Derek Chen-Becker wrote:
>
> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single  
> part
> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry  
> can't
> handle it.
>
> Derek
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
>>
>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super  
>> confident
>> I'll find such specs.
>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>>>
>>
>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>>
>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to  
>> convert
>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>>>   Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb. 
>>> 29.1254943736364;
>>>   Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Return-Path: 
>>> Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>> [174.143.236.122])
>>>   by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>>> 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>>>   Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>>> permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
>>> yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
>>> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>>> 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
>>> for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>>   by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>>>   for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400  
>>> (EDT)
>>> From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
>>> Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>>   boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
>>> Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>>>
>>> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>
>>> naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
>>> ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
>>> Request URL: [TODO]
>>> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>>>  wrote:
 Please send some test email to an account you can access using
>>> Thunderbird.
 Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really  
 plain
>>> text?
 What do the headers say it is?

 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com

 wrote:
>
> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a  
> URL.
> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For  
> some
> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is  
> it
> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I  
> solve
> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients  
> may
> not be able to view it.
> Thanks.
>
>



 --
 Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
 Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
 Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
 Surf the harmonics

>

>>>

>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>> Surf the harmonics
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> >


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

It isn't not handling the message, it's just not automatically hyperlinking the 
URL.
Any other ideas?
Thanks.

-
Derek Chen-Becker wrote:

The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
handle it.

Derek

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super confident
> I'll find such specs.
> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> >
> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
> >
>
> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>
> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to convert
> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>
>
> >
> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Return-Path: 
> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
> [174.143.236.122])
> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> > Request URL: [TODO]
> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
> >  wrote:
> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
> > Thunderbird.
> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain
> > text?
> > >  What do the headers say it is?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
> > >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> > >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
> > >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
> > >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
> > >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
> > >> not be able to view it.
> > >> Thanks.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> > > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> > > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> > > Surf the harmonics
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> Surf the harmonics
>
>
>
> >
>



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Derek Chen-Becker]

Looking at the code I don't think that it would be hard to "do the right
thing" depending on whether someone calls sendMail with a sequence of
MailBodyTypes or just a single PlainMailBodyType. If someone wants to open
an issue on it I could make the change.

Derek

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Pollak  wrote:

> In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did text-only
> messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker  > wrote:
>
>> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
>> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
>> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
>> handle it.
>>
>> Derek
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
>>> confident I'll find such specs.
>>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>>
>>> -
>>> David Pollak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim >> >wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>>> >
>>>
>>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>>>
>>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to convert
>>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>>> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id
>>> a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > Return-Path: 
>>> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>>> [174.143.236.122])
>>> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>>> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>>> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
>>> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
>>> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>>> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
>>> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>>> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
>>> (EDT)
>>> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
>>> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
>>> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
>>> > MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
>>> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>>> >
>>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
>>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>> >
>>> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
>>> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
>>> > Request URL: [TODO]
>>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>>> >  wrote:
>>> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
>>> > Thunderbird.
>>> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain
>>> > text?
>>> > >  What do the headers say it is?
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>>> > >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a
>>> URL.
>>> > >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
>>> > >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
>>> > >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
>>> > >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
>>> > >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
>>> > >> not be able to view it.
>>> > >> Thanks.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>>> > > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>>> > > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>>> > > Surf the harmonics
>>> > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>>> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>>> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>>> Surf the harmonics
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> Surf the harmonics
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are s

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

In the deep dark recesses of my memory, I think we originally did text-only
messages and there was some complaint about that... sigh.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Derek Chen-Becker
wrote:

> The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
> messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
> MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
> handle it.
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super
>> confident I'll find such specs.
>> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>>
>> -
>> David Pollak wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim > >wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>> >
>>
>> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>>
>> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to convert
>> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Return-Path: 
>> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
>> [174.143.236.122])
>> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
>> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
>> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
>> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
>> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
>> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
>> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400
>> (EDT)
>> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
>> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
>> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
>> > MIME-Version: 1.0
>> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
>> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>> >
>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> >
>> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
>> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
>> > Request URL: [TODO]
>> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>> >  wrote:
>> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
>> > Thunderbird.
>> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain
>> > text?
>> > >  What do the headers say it is?
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
>> naftoli...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
>> > >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
>> > >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
>> > >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
>> > >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
>> > >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
>> > >> not be able to view it.
>> > >> Thanks.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>> > > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>> > > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>> > > Surf the harmonics
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>> Surf the harmonics
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>


-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Derek Chen-Becker]

The way that Lift uses the API we don't support sending non-multipart
messages. I suppose that this could be refactored to support single part
MIME messages, but I really have trouble believing that a BlackBerry can't
handle it.

Derek

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super confident
> I'll find such specs.
> What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?
>
> -
> David Pollak wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >wrote:
>
> >
> > Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
> >
>
> GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.
>
> You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to convert
> messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.
>
>
> >
> > Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
> >Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Return-Path: 
> > Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net
> [174.143.236.122])
> >by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> > 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
> >Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> > permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> > yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> > 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> > for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> >by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
> >for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> > To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> > Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> > Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> > Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> > ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> > Request URL: [TODO]
> > --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
> >  wrote:
> > > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
> > Thunderbird.
> > >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain
> > text?
> > >  What do the headers say it is?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <
> naftoli...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
> > >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> > >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
> > >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
> > >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
> > >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
> > >> not be able to view it.
> > >> Thanks.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> > > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> > > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> > > Surf the harmonics
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> Surf the harmonics
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

True, I may have to do that at some point, although I'm not super confident 
I'll find such specs.
What do you say to Ross's comment? Why is it multipart?

-
David Pollak wrote:

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>

GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.

You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to convert
messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.


>
> Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Return-Path: 
> Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net[174.143.236.122])
>by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>
> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> Request URL: [TODO]
> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>  wrote:
> > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
> Thunderbird.
> >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain
> text?
> >  What do the headers say it is?
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
> >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
> >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
> >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
> >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
> >> not be able to view it.
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> > Surf the harmonics
> >
> > >
> >
>
> >
>


-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>

GMail munges things, so I don't know if that's the original message.

You might want to figure out what the specs are for blackberry to convert
messages and see why this kind of message is not being converted.


>
> Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Return-Path: 
> Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net[174.143.236.122])
>by mx.google.com with ESMTP id
> 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>
> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> Request URL: [TODO]
> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>  wrote:
> > Please send some test email to an account you can access using
> Thunderbird.
> >  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain
> text?
> >  What do the headers say it is?
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
> >> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> >> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
> >> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
> >> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
> >> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
> >> not be able to view it.
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> > Surf the harmonics
> >
> > >
> >
>
> >
>


-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Ross Mellgren]

That looks to be plain text, although it's using multipart encoding  
where it probably does not need to.

-Ross


On Oct 12, 2009, at 9:17 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original
>
> Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
>Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb. 
> 29.1254943736364;
>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Return-Path: 
> Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net  
> [174.143.236.122])
>by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 1si71430296yxe. 
> 11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
> permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
> yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> 174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
> for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
> Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>   by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
>   for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
> To: naftoli...@gmail.com
> Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
> Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>   boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
> Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
>
> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
> ; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
> Request URL: [TODO]
> --=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
>  wrote:
>> Please send some test email to an account you can access using  
>> Thunderbird.
>>  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really  
>> plain text?
>>  What do the headers say it is?
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim > >
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a  
>>> URL.
>>> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
>>> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
>>> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
>>> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
>>> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
>>> not be able to view it.
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
>> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
>> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
>> Surf the harmonics
>>
>>>
>>
>
> >


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[Naftoli Gugenheim]

Does this help? It's from GMail / Show original

Delivered-To: naftoli...@gmail.com
Received: by 10.86.30.11 with SMTP id d11cs12302fgd;
Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.19.149 with SMTP id a21mr391667qcb.29.1254943736364;
Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: 
Received: from lrbcol (174-143-236-122.static.slicehost.net [174.143.236.122])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 1si71430296yxe.11.2009.10.07.12.28.55;
Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 174.143.236.122 is neither
permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
yehu...@lrbcol.org) client-ip=174.143.236.122;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
174.143.236.122 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
for domain of yehu...@lrbcol.org) smtp.mail=yehu...@lrbcol.org
Received: from lrbcol (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by lrbcol (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB51A0055
for ; Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: yehu...@lrbcol.org
To: naftoli...@gmail.com
Message-ID: <2107786874.01254943736214.javamail.r...@lrbcol>
Subject: Detail of Transportation #843
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894"
Date: Wed,  7 Oct 2009 15:28:56 -0400 (EDT)

--=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

naftuli gugenheim; 617 6st
; M: 7325342893; From : ; To : 39 hearth ct;
Request URL: [TODO]
--=_Part_0_1227069312.1254943735894--


On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, David Pollak
 wrote:
> Please send some test email to an account you can access using Thunderbird.
>  Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain text?
>  What do the headers say it is?
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim 
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
>> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
>> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
>> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
>> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
>> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
>> not be able to view it.
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
> Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
> Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
> Surf the harmonics
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[Lift] Re: URL in PlainMailBodyType to BlackBerry

[David Pollak]

Please send some test email to an account you can access using Thunderbird.
 Open the message and look at the message source.  Is it really plain text?
 What do the headers say it is?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim wrote:

>
> Hi. I'm sending an email using PlainMailBodyType that contains a URL.
> Normally when a BlackBerry receives a plain text email it
> automatically hyperlinks URLS and potential phone numbers. For some
> reason this email is not being hyperlinked on the BlackBerry. Is it
> possible that it's somehow not purely plain text? How would I solve
> this? I don't want to send HTML messages because some recipients may
> not be able to view it.
> Thanks.
>
> >
>


-- 
Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net
Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890
Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp
Surf the harmonics

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---