This latter shoud be the case of
Return-Path: <>
This Return-Path header should get set based on the MAIL FROM: command during SMTP, so those should be the same IIRC.
Anyhow, I'm fixing a bug in AbstractRedirect that was causing a NPE trying to build a new TO using the sender, that it turned out null in some cases (spam or virus). I'm going to do the following in such case: use the sender, if null use the return path, if null set it to <>.
Can you have it just not set the TO?
But I'm asking myself too on what James does if it tries to send a message to an empty list of recipients, because for example NotifySender processes a mail that has a null sender as said above. The original NotifySender was doing this way, and the new one too. Should I change it to something like the following: use the sender, if null use the return path, if null leave it null (or throw an exception)?
Ideally the NotifySender should see the sender is null and not try to bounce to it. Separate from that, the LinearProcessor should see that there are no recipients anymore on a message, and end processing. I think the latter already happens, which is perhaps why the old code was just setting the recipient list empty.
-- Serge Knystautas President Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
