Using terceiro's fork of rmail#397
Using terceiro's fork of rmail#397gauteh merged 1 commit intosup-heliotrope:developfrom ZJvandeWeg:rmail
Conversation
|
You could try to re-index your entire message base, that should provide a |
|
Does this fix #205? |
|
Will look into that this evening. |
|
I've just looked at the issue, and the Regexp has not yet been changed in the new rmail. So #205 (comment) still happens. Im opening an issue right now. |
|
Note that the proposed fix in #205 probably is incorrect. |
|
Been running this branch now for a month or so; so far no problems. Just reindexed my maildir again, works flawless. |
|
We should set up tests for the changes we did to rmail-sup so that we are sure that tcerio-rmail handles the previous issues, as I mentioned: the fix in #205 should not be implemented as it is, it probably does not conform with standards. Mail standards are very hard to get right, which is a good reason for switching to the mail gem if possible. It seems to have a larger developer and user group, as well as being more modern (working better with recent rubies) and designed better than rmail. |
|
Also, it would be nice if the stuff we currently keep here: https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/blob/develop/lib/sup/util.rb#L80 could be moved to rmail. |
|
As I also meniton in terceiro/rmail#1 there is a bunch of tests that currently fail in #214 that would be nice to add to this PR, if they cannot be fixed atm, perhaps add them as expected failures. |
|
Allright, wasn't aware of the desire to swap towards the mail gem over rmail. |
|
Yup, check out: #127. But, I don't remember exactly where I left off anymore - there are some issues and stuff that needs re-implementation. It would, in my opinion, be a major advancement though. |
|
Will take a look into that when I've got the time then! |
2 participants
Potentially closes #394, will run this branch for the next period to see if something broke.