Issue 2550751
Created on 2012-03-29 08:41 by ntgarces, last changed 2016-07-04 14:41 by rouilj.
Files | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | Remove |
moz-screenshot-17.png | ntgarces, 2012-03-29 08:41 | Screenshot showing the x-roundup-issue-files included in the email header. |
Messages | |||
---|---|---|---|
msg4521 | Author: [hidden] (ntgarces) | Date: 2012-03-29 08:41 | |
Is it possible to remove the "x-roundup-issue-files" from the email header? We were having problems with active issues with lots of attachment since all attachments (filenames) are included in every message header and this is now being blocked by our gateway due to large header. -Noel |
|||
msg4522 | Author: [hidden] (schlatterbeck) | Date: 2012-03-29 10:56 | |
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 08:41:16AM +0000, Noel Garces wrote: > > Is it possible to remove the "x-roundup-issue-files" from the email header? > > We were having problems with active issues with lots of attachment since > all attachments (filenames) are included in every message header and > this is now being blocked by our gateway due to large header. Would it help you if we make the X-Roundup-XXX headers a config option? These are currently created for each Link or Multilink attribute of an issue that has a 'name' attribute... Ralf -- Dr. Ralf Schlatterbeck Tel: +43/2243/26465-16 Open Source Consulting www: http://www.runtux.com Reichergasse 131, A-3411 Weidling email: office@runtux.com osAlliance member email: rsc@osalliance.com |
|||
msg4523 | Author: [hidden] (ntgarces) | Date: 2012-03-29 11:11 | |
Thanks for the reply. If it's possible to do it via config then it would help us a lot. |
|||
msg4530 | Author: [hidden] (ntgarces) | Date: 2012-04-05 16:40 | |
Hi, when can i expect the update to be release? |
|||
msg4533 | Author: [hidden] (ber) | Date: 2012-04-13 09:49 | |
Hi Noel, this issue will be fixed, once someone has done the necessary development work. If you have a strong interest in it, you can try to find someone to create a patch to address the issue or try it yourself. The developers in the roundup community will help and come to request on their own timing, so we are really grateful for reports, suggestions, discussions, wishes and all this. Given limited development power, it can still take a while until somebody gets around following up, though. But again, with Free Software, you have more options to progress the issue. Best, Bernhard |
|||
msg5717 | Author: [hidden] (rouilj) | Date: 2016-07-02 20:40 | |
Ralf: Could this be handled by a simple change to your patch for implementing: msg_header_property set msg_header_property=None to suppress the header? -- rouilj |
|||
msg5728 | Author: [hidden] (schlatterbeck) | Date: 2016-07-03 14:52 | |
On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 08:40:57PM +0000, John Rouillard wrote: > > Ralf: > > Could this be handled by a simple change to your patch for implementing: > > msg_header_property > > set msg_header_property=None to suppress the header? Yes I think this should work, adding a test for this would be a good idea to make it a documented use-case. Ralf |
|||
msg5729 | Author: [hidden] (rouilj) | Date: 2016-07-03 19:44 | |
Hi Ralf: In message <20160703145255.GF15240@runtux.com>, Ralf Schlatterbeck writes: >Ralf Schlatterbeck added the comment: >On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 08:40:57PM +0000, John Rouillard wrote: >> Could this be handled by a simple change to your patch for implementing: >> >> msg_header_property >> >> set msg_header_property=None to suppress the header? > >Yes I think this should work, adding a test for this would be a good >idea to make it a documented use-case. Sounds good, but I don't see any tests for the msg_header_property code. I assume you forgot to chekc them in when you checked in the code. Could you check in your test and I will update it with the None case. |
|||
msg5730 | Author: [hidden] (rouilj) | Date: 2016-07-03 23:30 | |
Setting the param to None won't work as that is the default value if the msg_header_property is not specified 8-). I coded it so that setting it to the empty string "" will work. I have the 3 lines of code and a test committed. See changeset: a927f9549af0 |
|||
msg5737 | Author: [hidden] (ber) | Date: 2016-07-04 07:56 | |
I wonder if there is a limit on header lines in the standards (or in practice). If there is not, it may be a defect gateway software which we should call out. How many file attachments are we talking about anyway? What is the purpose of the header? |
|||
msg5739 | Author: [hidden] (rouilj) | Date: 2016-07-04 14:41 | |
Hi Bern: In message <1467618984.93.0.619589278254.issue2550751@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> , Bernhard Reiter writes: >I wonder if there is a limit on header lines in the standards >(or in practice). If there is not, it may be a defect gateway software >which we should call out. AFAIK there is no standards limit to a header length. Each line is limited to 1000 characters IIRC. But headers can span multiple lines. Continuation lines are indented with a space under the header line. This discussion seems to support my thoughts: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2721605/maximum-size-of-email-x-headers That being said email -> X gateways, exchange ... may have practical limitations, but I don't know of any off the top of my head. My claim is the property header should either be disabled or contain the full info available to be useful. >How many file attachments are we talking about anyway? Potentially it could be unlimited. >What is the purpose of the header? It looks like the headers were added by: changeset: 3956:bb2722260e47 user: Richard Jones <richard@users.sourceforge.net> date: Tue Jan 08 20:55:26 2008 +0000 files: CHANGES.txt doc/index.txt roundup/roundupdb.py description: Fixes from Martin v. L?wis: - Messages created through the web are now given an in-reply-to header when email out to nosy - Nosy messages now include more information about issues (all link properties with a "name" attribute) google for "Martin Löwis x-roundup" points to: http://grokbase.com/t/python/tracker-discuss/0817bzj3rw/additional-headers and that references some issues at: Title: add keyword info in emails http://psf.upfronthosting.co.za/roundup/meta/issue140 User want to see if the patch keyword was added to an issue so he can filter email. Title: Tracker emails should list the classification http://psf.upfronthosting.co.za/roundup/meta/issue143 User wanted the classification so he could filter emails. Final comment: This is now fixed in r59861; the tracker sends X-Roundup-issue-components, as a comma separated list (omitted if there are no components associated with the issue). Does this answer your question? |
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2016-07-04 14:41:53 | rouilj | set | messages: + msg5739 |
2016-07-04 07:56:24 | ber | set | messages: + msg5737 |
2016-07-03 23:30:08 | rouilj | set | status: new -> fixed assignee: rouilj resolution: fixed messages: + msg5730 |
2016-07-03 19:44:40 | rouilj | set | messages: + msg5729 |
2016-07-03 14:53:00 | schlatterbeck | set | messages: + msg5728 |
2016-07-02 20:40:57 | rouilj | set | nosy:
+ rouilj messages: + msg5717 |
2012-04-13 09:49:01 | ber | set | messages: + msg4533 |
2012-04-05 16:40:59 | ntgarces | set | messages: + msg4530 |
2012-03-29 11:11:52 | ntgarces | set | messages: + msg4523 |
2012-03-29 10:56:27 | schlatterbeck | set | messages: + msg4522 |
2012-03-29 08:41:16 | ntgarces | create |