Hello Simon,
Tuesday, May 3, 2011, 1:09:21 AM, you wrote:
>> begin 644 thebat_error_20110430.gif
>
>> end
> I see this as just the uuencoded data. However this is what I would
> expect as there are no MIME headers in this mail, so any MUA should
> just show it as plain text. I have tried on 3 d
Hello Simon,
On Mon, 2 May 2011 21:09:21 -0300 GMT (03/May/11, 7:09 AM +0700 GMT),
Simon Martin wrote:
SM> I see this as just the uuencoded data. However this is what I
SM> would expect as there are no MIME headers in this mail, so any MUA
SM> should just show it as plain text. I have tried on 3
Hello Simon,
> I just tested Gene's mail using Windows Live Mail and I see the
> image. As Tony said, some MUA are more forgiving, from what you say, TB!4.x
> is more forgiving as well.
> Is this a bug or a feature though?
I wouldn't want to distract the devs from the more pressing issues:
Fil
> Hello Simon,
> On Mon, 2 May 2011 21:09:21 -0300 GMT (03/May/11, 7:09 AM +0700 GMT),
> Simon Martin wrote:
SM>> I see this as just the uuencoded data. However this is what I
SM>> would expect as there are no MIME headers in this mail, so any MUA
SM>> should just show it as plain text. I have tr
Hello Tony,
On Tue, 3 May 2011 18:00:58 +0100 GMT (04/May/11, 0:00 AM +0700 GMT),
Tony Hoare wrote:
>> I just tested Gene's mail using Windows Live Mail and I see the
>> image. As Tony said, some MUA are more forgiving, from what you say, TB!4.x
>> is more forgiving as well.
>> Is this a bug or
Dear Tony,
@3-May-2011, 09:36 Tony Hoare [TH] in
mid:1711480403.20110503093...@parkinch.co.uk said to Simon:
...
TH> I do see this a lot from various senders so it would be great if TB
TH> could handle this ONE DAY. I understand there are a lot more important
TH> issues for now.
TH> Gene, was
Hello Simon,
Sorry for top-posting, but my email client is not very good at HTML... ;-)
These are a few of the headers I found in the source of the incoming message:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--1016115C1189A014"
1016115C1189A014
Content-Type:
Hello Marck,
On Wed, 4 May 2011 21:38:49 +0100 GMT (05/May/11, 3:38 AM +0700 GMT),
Marck Pearlstone wrote:
TH>> Gene, was this actually produced buy TB?
MP> Aye - there's the rub!
MP> This message came in using Forte agent via the GMane feed for this
MP> list. A double whammy by any definition.
On Sat, 7 May 2011 13:43:20 -0300, Simon Martin wrote:
>Could someone who is NOT using Courier please save the mail,
>zip it and PM it to me please.
Just out of curiosity I did a little test of my own.
- In Forte Agent I saved the offending message in Unix Mailbox format.
The relevant parts of
Dear Arjan,
@08-May-2011, 14:31 +0200 (08-May 13:31 here) Arjan de Groot [ADG]
in mid:881ds6d2263do6jvu2vs4nd4p2q6soc...@4ax.com said:
ADG> For clarity: this also means TB! is not just simply importing messages
ADG> but modifies them while importing. I am not quite sure if it should be
ADG> allow
Hello Marck,
On Sun, 8 May 2011 13:47:02 +0100 GMT (08/May/11, 19:47 PM +0700 GMT),
Marck Pearlstone wrote:
ADG>> For clarity: this also means TB! is not just simply importing messages
ADG>> but modifies them while importing. I am not quite sure if it should be
ADG>> allowed to do that.
MP> When
Dear Thomas,
@8-May-2011, 23:52 +0700 (08-May 17:52 here) Thomas Fernandez [TOG]
in mid:24048256.20110508235...@thomas-bkk.my-fqdn.de said to Marck:
...
MP>> When importing messages from a non-email compliant (news)
MP>> format, of course TB has to reformat the messages to be fully
MP>> MIME com
Hello Marck,
On Sun, 8 May 2011 18:08:59 +0100 GMT (09/May/11, 0:08 AM +0700 GMT),
Marck Pearlstone wrote:
MP> I think TB may have lost the ability to decode inline UUE in the
MP> re-write. It clearly still has a UUE decoder for use in the
MP> importer. As for why some can and some can't see the
Dear Thomas,
@9-May-2011, 00:28 +0700 (08-May 18:28 here) Thomas Fernandez [TOG]
in mid:6410625341.20110509002...@thomas-bkk.my-fqdn.de said to Marck:
...
MP>> I think TB may have lost the ability to decode inline UUE in the
MP>> re-write.
...
TOG> What's your opinion on this? Should TB! conti
Hello Marck,
On Sun, 8 May 2011 18:35:07 +0100 GMT (09/May/11, 0:35 AM +0700 GMT),
Marck Pearlstone wrote:
MP> ...
MP>>> I think TB may have lost the ability to decode inline UUE in the
MP>>> re-write.
MP> ...
TOG>> What's your opinion on this? Should TB! continue to decode UUE? I for
TOG>> on
Hello Thomas,
Sunday, May 8, 2011, 6:50:25 PM, you wrote:
> Hello Marck,
> On Sun, 8 May 2011 18:35:07 +0100 GMT (09/May/11, 0:35 AM +0700 GMT),
> Marck Pearlstone wrote:
MP>> ...
MP I think TB may have lost the ability to decode inline UUE in the
MP re-write.
MP>> ...
TOG>>> What's
Hi Tony,
>> We have both made our points, the decision is now with Ritlabs. And
>> then ultimately, with their paying customers and *their* priorities
>> with reading emails and viewing attachments.
> Funny how one's priorities change.
> I am getting a contact form by email from a website cod
17 matches
Mail list logo
