Mika Hawkins <jorgiemor...@outlook.com> added the comment:

Truly for the vault changes. I thought we had fixed the bug that was causing 
message-id to get encoded, yet perhaps it despite everything exists in 3.7? I 
don't recall when we fixed it (and I might be recollecting incorrectly!) 

With respect to X-"unstructured headers" getting destroyed, by *definition* in 
the rfc, if the header body is unstructured it must help RFC encoding. In the 
event that doesn't, it's anything but an unstructured header field. Which is 
the reason I said we have to consider what attributes the default parser ought 
to have. The RFC doesn't generally address that, it anticipates that each 
header should be one of the characterized types...but while a X-header may be 
of a characterized type, the email bundle can't realize that except if it is 
told, so what would it be a good idea for us to use as the default parsing 
procedure? "text without encoded words" isn't generally RFC consistent, I 
think. (In spite of the fact that I'll let it be known has been some time since 
I last explored the important RFCs.) 

Note that I accept that we have an open issue (or if nothing else an open 
conversation) that we should change the 'refold_source' default from 'long' to 
'none', which implies that X-headers would in any event be gone through of 
course. It would likewise alleviate this issue, and can be utilized as a nearby 
workaround for headers that are simply getting gone through and not altered.

Regards,
Mika Hawkins

----------
nosy: +Mika_Hawkins

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue41553>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to