Encode Content-Type and Content-Disposition parameters using RFC 2231 parameter encoding#52
Open
Aloisius wants to merge 2 commits intostalwartlabs:mainfrom
Open
Encode Content-Type and Content-Disposition parameters using RFC 2231 parameter encoding#52Aloisius wants to merge 2 commits intostalwartlabs:mainfrom
Aloisius wants to merge 2 commits intostalwartlabs:mainfrom
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Currently, mail-builder encodes Content-Type and Content-Disposition parameter values using RFC 2047 encoding. This is meant for email headers using the 'text', 'comment' and 'word' tokens (as defined by RFC 822). Content-Type and Content-Disposition parameter values do not use any of those tokens.
This modifies mail-builder to encode parameters using RFC 2231 encoding instead. It will attempt use simple quoted string values when possible, or fall back to utf-8 extended encoding if not.
This also resolves #51