[Mailman-Developers] multipart/alternative

Brad Knowles brad.knowles at skynet.be
Wed Mar 10 06:09:18 EST 2004

At 2:09 AM -0700 2004/03/10, Jim Cole wrote:

>  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?

	I believe so, yes.

>  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?

	Why would you do this?  What do you have in multipart/alternative 
that would require this kind of action?

>  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.

	Yes.  Just list multipart/alternative as one of the formats to 
pass unchanged.  Go to "Content Filtering", then add 
"multipart/alternative" to the "pass_mime_types" field (the second 
big one on the page).  Note that you have to have filtering turned on 
for this to have any effect -- if you don't have filtering turned on 
(the radio button at the top), then no filtering should be done.

Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles at skynet.be>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
     -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)

More information about the Mailman-Developers mailing list