New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

support multiple To's in sendMail #582

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 17, 2014

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@Extrawurst
Contributor

Extrawurst commented Mar 16, 2014

No description provided.

@s-ludwig

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@s-ludwig

s-ludwig Mar 17, 2014

Member

Thanks. I think the only thing missing now for fully correct support is to do foreach (addr; v.splitter(",").map(addr => addr.strip())), because a comma separated list is what RFC 5322 specifies. I couldn't find a mention of multiple "To" headers, but I guess that any client will merge those to a comma separated list according to RFC 822, so it should be equivalent.

Is that something you'd also like to add, or should I quickly do that?

Member

s-ludwig commented Mar 17, 2014

Thanks. I think the only thing missing now for fully correct support is to do foreach (addr; v.splitter(",").map(addr => addr.strip())), because a comma separated list is what RFC 5322 specifies. I couldn't find a mention of multiple "To" headers, but I guess that any client will merge those to a comma separated list according to RFC 822, so it should be equivalent.

Is that something you'd also like to add, or should I quickly do that?

@Extrawurst

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Extrawurst

Extrawurst Mar 17, 2014

Contributor

@s-ludwig no I am fine, go for it if you like ;)

Contributor

Extrawurst commented Mar 17, 2014

@s-ludwig no I am fine, go for it if you like ;)

@Extrawurst

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Extrawurst

Extrawurst Mar 17, 2014

Contributor

ok what the heck i gonna do it, I need this fix ;) we are just talking about the stuff thats written inside the DATA segment, right ? so after writing the TOs I will simply do you convert code ?!

Contributor

Extrawurst commented Mar 17, 2014

ok what the heck i gonna do it, I need this fix ;) we are just talking about the stuff thats written inside the DATA segment, right ? so after writing the TOs I will simply do you convert code ?!

@s-ludwig

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@s-ludwig

s-ludwig Mar 17, 2014

Member

I'll merge and make the change. My first message already took longer to type ;)
There will be no heap/GC allocations, so anything in the DATA segment will be used as is.

Member

s-ludwig commented Mar 17, 2014

I'll merge and make the change. My first message already took longer to type ;)
There will be no heap/GC allocations, so anything in the DATA segment will be used as is.

s-ludwig added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2014

Merge pull request #582 from Extrawurst/patch-1
support multiple To's in sendMail

@s-ludwig s-ludwig merged commit bbe789e into vibe-d:master Mar 17, 2014

1 check passed

default The Travis CI build passed
Details
@Extrawurst

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Extrawurst

Extrawurst Mar 17, 2014

Contributor

IMHO this syntax rules here: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0822.txt
seem to suggest that indeed multiple "To" in the DATA segment are valid anyway

Contributor

Extrawurst commented Mar 17, 2014

IMHO this syntax rules here: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0822.txt
seem to suggest that indeed multiple "To" in the DATA segment are valid anyway

@Extrawurst Extrawurst deleted the Extrawurst:patch-1 branch Mar 17, 2014

@s-ludwig

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@s-ludwig

s-ludwig Mar 17, 2014

Member

Ah OK now I get it. I thought you meant something with the DATA segment of the executable.

The only question now is if RFC 5322 still supports multiple To headers, or if that's deprecated. At least it always talks about those fields in singular and section 4.5 seems to imply that multiple occurrences might be deprecated now, but I didn't find a concrete statement.

Member

s-ludwig commented Mar 17, 2014

Ah OK now I get it. I thought you meant something with the DATA segment of the executable.

The only question now is if RFC 5322 still supports multiple To headers, or if that's deprecated. At least it always talks about those fields in singular and section 4.5 seems to imply that multiple occurrences might be deprecated now, but I didn't find a concrete statement.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment