Re: PATCH: balsa-subject

[Brian Stafford <brian stafford uklinux net>]

On Tue,  2 October 14:25 Ali Akcaagac wrote:

>  neverthless this isnt the SOLUTION in how it should behave really.
>   a) it uses the 'is_ready_to_send(BalsaSendmsg * bsmsg)' which also
>     checks for '@' signs in the text entered. but this shouldnt be
>     a problem at all.

Its true that mailbox addresses sent on the internet should be
fully formed i.e. "rfc2822-atom@domain.name" syntax (it can't be delivered
otherwise :).  If the MUA submits the message on port 25, this should be
enforced by the UA.

OTOH on port 587 the MTA (MSA) is free to process the message before
relaying it on port 25.  This might include rewriting the message headers
and SMTP envelope, e.g. by supplying a missing domain name.  In this case,
the UA need not enforce RFC 2822 as rigorously.  Just to be akward, RFC 2476
on mail submission allows port 25 to have port 587 semantics as long as it
is not publicly referenced (i.e. no MX records or behind a firewall).  So
it's a bit difficult to tell if the UA should be rigorous or relaxed about
RFC 2822.

>  b) i dont know if this is RFC conform at all :)

RFC 2822 only requires a message to have originator and date headers.
(I know this because libESMTP incorrectly insisted on recipient
headers and I got told off for this mistake :( )

>  c) the right way would look like this. if you press either send,
>     postphone or queue, then at least a function should check for
>     an empty subject then open a dialog where you can enter the
>     subject or leave it empty.

This sounds reasonable to me.  RFC 2822 does not require a message to
have a subject.  However a missing subject is most likely a mistake
on the user's part.  It doesn't hurt for balsa to double check with the
user.  What I don't like is Nutscrape's habit of unexpectedly adding
"(No Subject)" if I leave the subject empty.

==
Brian