[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-30?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12529221
 ] 

Robert Burrell Donkin commented on MIME4J-30:
---------------------------------------------

The only use cases I know are ones where the mime body part should never be 
decoded (regardless of the transfer-encoding). 

Adding  a boolean goes against the grain of the design of the rest of the API. 
A similar case (raw entities) is handled by using a field rather than a 
parameter.  The parameter would only make sense when within a body: other parts 
would ignore it. 

> Transfer-encoding should be transparent
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MIME4J-30
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-30
>             Project: Mime4j
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 0.3
>            Reporter: Jochen Wiedmann
>            Assignee: Robert Burrell Donkin
>             Fix For: 0.4
>
>         Attachments: mime4j-transfer-encoding.patch, 
> mime4j-transfer-encoding.patch
>
>
> Currently the mime4j user must be aware of the transfer-encoding header.
> a) This is inconvenient. I can think of no reason, why a user should want the 
> encoded data stream.
> b) This blocks MIME4J-27 in the following sense: If a user configures a limit 
> on the attachments size,
>      then this should most possibly limit the decoded attachments size. But 
> Mime4j can only track
>      the decoded attachments size, if it is itself responsible for decoding.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to