Closed Bug 348821 Opened 18 years ago Closed 16 years ago

Please describe about new "RFC2231 compliance" and "how to fall back to mal-use of RFC2047" in "Release Notes", in order to avoid more DUPs of Bug 309566

Categories

(Thunderbird :: General, defect)

defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: World, Unassigned)

References

Details

This is spin-off of Bug 309566 Comment #37 and Bug 309566 Comment #40 by Jungshik Shin.

Please describe about new "RFC2331 compliance" and "how to fall back to mal-use of RFC2047" in "Release Notes", in order to avoid more DUPs of Bug 309566.
MS's support of RFC2331 doesn't look to be done in very near future, and MS Outlook Express in MS Windows Vista doesn't seem to support RFC2331.  

(Copy of my Bug 309566 Comment #37)

It looks for me that clear description in "Release Notes" is sufficient for many users.
 [Compatibility]
   [Mail attachment's filename]
    We've stopped mal-use of RFC2047 in name/filename parameter.
    We use RFC2231 correctly from now on for name/filename parameter,
    based on IETF's RFC.
    However, some old mail clients maybe doesn't support RFC2231 correctly.
    For example, MS Outlook family, Eudora, Lotus Notes, some Mobile phones
    and some Web mails.
    For compatibility with such old mailers, we have an option to fall back to
    mal-use of RFC2047 for name/filename parameter.
    - Set mail.strictly_mime.parm_folding to 0 thru config editor.
    To get back to no mal-use of RFC2047 again,
    change mail.strictly_mime.parm_folding back to 2 thru config editor.
    See Bug 193439 and Bug 309566 for detail.
(But I also believe Bug 323388 & Bug 323390 are very kind for users and are
required.)
Keywords: relnote
Summary: Please describe about new "RFC2331 compliance" and "how to fall back to mal-use of RFC2047" in "Release Notes", in order to avoid more DUPs of Bug 309566 → Please describe about new "RFC2231 compliance" and "how to fall back to mal-use of RFC2047" in "Release Notes", in order to avoid more DUPs of Bug 309566
Unfortunately, the text in comment #0 I think is way too low-level for release notes.  I'd love a simpler version explaining when to do what.

Also, I note that this bug is getting a bit old -- maybe the versions of Outlook etc. that caused problems aren't that common anymore?
Assignee: mscott → nobody
Whoa, this is for 1.5 only?  If so, we should close this, as we're not doing any more 1.5 releases.
(In reply to comment #2)
> Whoa, this is for 1.5 only?

Yes, although I expected description in rel-note of Tb 2 if no description by 1.5.
Unwanted/needless bugs after release of Tb 2.0 were fewer than I afraided.
Please close as WONTFIX.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Keywords: relnote
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.