Custom Query (332 matches)
Results (184 - 186 of 332)
Ticket | Resolution | Summary | Owner | Reporter |
---|---|---|---|---|
#242 | fixed | Identifying reporter sometime fails with bi-case email addresses | bas | dmcr@… |
Description |
Hi Bas, I had a reporter who updated a ticket he had created; and since email2trac did not recognize him as the reporter, it started a new ticket (while using ticket_permission_system = update_restricted_to_participants). It turned out to be due to the reporter sometimes using a bi-case email address, and email2trac not always using the lower() method to standardize the addresses. The attached patch fixes this case, and other similar ones. Best regards,
|
|||
#230 | fixed | HTML-parts are attached as `None` instead of `untiteled-part.ext` | bas | hju@… |
Description |
Since upgrade to email2trac 1.2.0 and trac 0.11.6 in 03/2010 (currently running email2trac 1.4.6), inline-parts of html-mails (like images/jpg or text/html) are attached as None. Anyway, images are included and shown "inline" in the Ticket-description as expected. Obviously, part.get_filename() in def get_message_parts() returns 'None' instead of ''. So the code: if not filename: filename = 'untitled-part' # Guess the extension from the content type, use non strict mode # some additional non-standard but commonly used MIME types # are also recognized # ext = mimetypes.guess_extension(part.get_content_type(), False) if not ext: ext = '.bin' filename = '%s%s' % (filename, ext) in def unique_attachment_names() has no longer effekt at all. As I couldn't find get_filename(), I can't trace down to the source of the problem. Is it email2trac or perhaps an issue of our trac-update? Sorry for reporting so late, but I have not investigatet this any further... |
|||
#152 | fixed | HTML-mails content not stored in description of ticket | anonymous | hju@… |
Description |
We encountered a new problem with html-mails. The mail-content is not transfered in the ticket description. (It is a new installed version of email2trac under windows...) No problems till now with html-mails under the old installation (0.3) Example: Looks like ticket #135 Any idea? |