[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