Message.Encoder and a few other bits #6
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Purely cosmetic in the output.
RFC5322 permits optional CFWS between the brackets but RFC5321 defines the null reverse-path as <> so it seems better to write that instead.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR exposes
Message.Encoderand expands the PoC implementation to include serialising message types and toplevel headers. I've tweaked the order of a few fields (within, I believe, the RFCs in all cases) just as it was easier when diffing against other mail libraries.This is working on a production server where I decode an email, do some processing on it, generate a new email (as a
Message.message) which, amongst other things, includes the original email as an attachment and then serialise that message usingMessage.Encoder