[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-60?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12616206#action_12616206
]
Stefano Bagnara commented on MIME4J-60:
---------------------------------------
About who should canonicalize I'm not sure I agree.
Canonicalisation should be done by ANYONE dealing with mime contents and having
a mime message in its output.
A relaying MTA MUST NOT change the content and simply have to add the Received
header (this is done without any parsing, so has mime in output but it is only
the payload for which a relaying MTA has no parsing needs). A relaying MTA
shouldn't even parse the message at all. As soon as you parse the message and
alter it it is no more defined a Relaying MTA from the RFCs and so as soon as
you alter the message you should also make sure that you produce canonincal/rfc
compliant output.
What features are needed in mime4j mainly depend on where you want to use it.
Just to share my understandings/opinions.
> Configurable strategy for line delimiters
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: MIME4J-60
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-60
> Project: Mime4j
> Issue Type: Wish
> Affects Versions: 0.4
> Reporter: Stefano Bagnara
> Fix For: 0.5
>
> Attachments: MIME4J-60-readLine-returns-no-newline.patch,
> newlines-tests.zip, newlinestrat.patch
>
>
> There is an ongoing discussion about how we should deal with non canonical
> line endings (isolated LF and/or isolated CR).
> This issue is to track discussion results and proposed patches.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
