Added uniqid() filename option

[lucavallin]

In a project of mine I needed to save attachments using a unique filename.
Now you can choose between the original filename or a unique one by simply setting $use_uniqueFilename = true when calling saveAttachments($attach_dir, $use_uniqueFilename = false).
Unique filename is generated using uniqid().

[eXorus]

Thanks, could you check code coverage and continuous integration before I can merge it ?

[lucavallin]

Surely I will, probably in the weekend.

[eXorus]

The weekend was very long :)

[lucavallin]

I'm sorry, I moved to another country in the meantime and I forgot about the PR. I doubt I will have the room to focus on this any time soon.

[necenzurat]

Is this week on Pluto?

[eXorus]

Someone to continue ? :)

[gmta]

This change feels awkward to me for a couple of reasons:

• It generates unique filenames for attachments whether you use them or not
• It uses uniqid() instead of tempnam() which was basically made for generating unique filenames in a specific directory
• It expands an API method with a boolean argument which is not Best Practice TM
• It changes the public Attachment API (constructor argument)

However, because email attachments can have filename collisions, this is a needed feature in some form. It also exposes a bug in the current Parser->saveAttachments() method: it overwrites attachments with the same name.

I would suggest implementing it as follows:

• Add a test to expose the ->saveAttachments() issue with duplicate filenames
• Fix ->saveAttachments() by adding a behavioral argument:
  1. Use original filenames and throw exception on duplicates (default)
  2. Use original filenames but generate unique suffix on duplicates
  3. Always generate fully unique filenames

@eXorus what do you think?

[eXorus]

Sorry I didn't saw your contribution @gmta

I think it's a very good proposition I will prefer to have the option 2 by default. And I agree with all your remarks.

Thanks, could you do this PR ?

[gmta]

@eXorus Sure, I've just created PR #139.

[amrkamboj1988]

It's dropping the extension of the attachment. How to make sure to generate a file with relevant exptension in the case of duplicity.

[gmta]

Hi @amrkamboj1988, you should probably raise a new issue for that. The proposed solution here does indeed drop the filename extension, but you could create a PR since adding the extension back is relatively simple. However, please also consider not using file extensions but rather Content-Type for file type detection.