AW: LOG4NET-405 (was Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 1.2.13 based on RC2)

2013-11-15 Thread Dominik Psenner
>On 2013-11-14, Dominik Psenner wrote: > >>> I'm not sure whether setting the encoding to UTF8 triggers some sort of >>> different handling inside of the framweork's SMTP code even if the test >>> was pure ASCII. If it doesn't, then I'm fine with UTF8. > >> and checking a few of my Gmail's mails i

Re: LOG4NET-405 (was Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 1.2.13 based on RC2)

2013-11-14 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 2013-11-14, Dominik Psenner wrote: >> I'm not sure whether setting the encoding to UTF8 triggers some sort of >> different handling inside of the framweork's SMTP code even if the test >> was pure ASCII. If it doesn't, then I'm fine with UTF8. > and checking a few of my Gmail's mails it seems

AW: LOG4NET-405 (was Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 1.2.13 based on RC2)

2013-11-14 Thread Dominik Psenner
>> Thought of that too, but I decided to let it be in UTF8 cause its the most >> compatible format nowadays whereas ASCII is somewhat antique. What do >you >> think? > >IIUC ASCII would have been the implicit body encoding for log4net < >1.2.12 so when looking for a backwards compatible default thi

LOG4NET-405 (was Re: [VOTE] Release Log4Net 1.2.13 based on RC2)

2013-11-13 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 2013-11-13, Dominik Psenner wrote: > Thought of that too, but I decided to let it be in UTF8 cause its the most > compatible format nowadays whereas ASCII is somewhat antique. What do you > think? IIUC ASCII would have been the implicit body encoding for log4net < 1.2.12 so when looking for a