You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-dev@james.apache.org by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> on 2008/12/07 17:08:01 UTC
Re: svn commit: r724142
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> i'm unhappy about the impact of this resolution for direct users of this method
>
Robert,
What would you like done differently?
Oleg
> - robert
>
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 3:26 PM, <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: olegk
>> Date: Sun Dec 7 07:26:00 2008
>> New Revision: 724142
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=724142&view=rev
>> Log:
>> MIME4J-90: Consistent parsing of header field names
>> Contributed by Markus Wiederkehr <markus.wiederkehr at gmail.com>
>>
>> Modified:
>> james/mime4j/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/james/mime4j/field/Field.java
>> james/mime4j/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/james/mime4j/message/Header.java
>> james/mime4j/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/james/mime4j/message/SimpleContentHandler.java
>> james/mime4j/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/james/mime4j/parser/AbstractEntity.java
>> james/mime4j/trunk/src/test/java/org/apache/james/mime4j/field/FieldTest.java
>>
...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r724142
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>
>> i'm unhappy about the impact of this resolution for direct users of this
>> method
>>
>
> Robert,
>
> What would you like done differently?
it's quite a change for a public API given that mail protocol users
may be relying on catching that MimeException. i dislike throwing
runtimes because this usually means that the processing is dead and
the mail will be impossible to process. unreadable fields can usually
be ignored when processing so recovery is possible.
i'd prefer to see a name change for the field to go with the change in
behaviour, that way it's obvious that it's changed. i haven't followed
all the discussions too deeply so there may some other strategies
which may works equally well. maintaining the original method might
also be useful if it's used elsewhere in James (i'll need to check
that).
(it also needs to be documented etc but i'm happy to dive in and fix that)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org