[Mailman-Developers] multipart/alternative

Jim Cole lists at yggdrasill.net
Wed Mar 10 04:09:05 EST 2004


Hi - I had a few questions regarding the handling of 
multipart/alternative that I was hoping someone would be kind enough to 
answer. The questions are all in reference to the 2.1 branch.

Based on the code, comments, etc. it appears that removal of all parts 
other than the first non-empty alternative is intended as a feature and 
considered a good thing. Is this correct?

If the answer to the first question is yes, why? I am not challenging, 
but instead hoping to understand the considerations that led to this 
design decision before trying to work my way around it. Is the decision 
motivated by something deeper than simply eliminating some extra bytes?

If I were to simply remove the call to collapse_multipart_alternatives, 
would that allow the multipart/alternative part to slip through 
unmolested? Does later processing code depend on multipart/alternative 
parts being collapsed?

Besides turning off filtering altogether, is there any other simple way 
to get Mailman to pass multipart/alternative as-is? Stripping 
alternatives is not likely to be acceptable for the environment to 
which we would be deploying.

Thanks!

Jim




More information about the Mailman-Developers mailing list