Open
Conversation
This because we still have CI target from before OTP-24
Collaborator
|
@seriyps On first glance this looks good to me, and all tests are passing. Can you add a review? |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 implements RFC 3030, which defines the CHUNKING and BINARYMIME extensions.
This implementation is rather conservative in the changes it makes to gen_smtp, in particular regarding the API.
On the server side, by default:
handle_EHLOcallback by setting it totrue) because such messages always bypass the newline fixing and may not be UTF8, contrary to what one might reasonably expect when implementinghandle_DATA. It is not currently possible to know whether a message was sent with this body type, should this be implemented? Feedback welcome here.On the client side, by default:
BDATcommand) will not be used, even if possible, for now (I'd like to have feedback first, but otherwise it should not be a problem to use it by default whenever possible);