[Tickets #4367] NEW: forwarding multipart/related messages

[bugs@bugs.horde.org]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. THIS EMAIL ADDRESS IS NOT MONITORED.

Ticket URL: http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/?id=4367
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ticket             | 4367
 Created By         | robin.west at dal.ca
 Summary            | forwarding multipart/related messages
 Queue              | IMP
 Version            | 4.0.3
 Type               | Enhancement
 State              | New
 Priority           | 1. Low
 Owners             | 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


robin.west at dal.ca (2006-08-30 10:20) wrote:

I don't have a very in-depth understanding of MIME types, and I'm not
well-versed on what the proper standards are for how this stuff should
work, but I've noticed various different behaviours amongst mail clients
when forwarding multipart messages. Specifically if I have a
multipart/related message (eg. some HTML with an embedded image), when I
forward it (to myself) I get these results:

Outlook Express: 
---multipart/related 
------text/plain
------text/html
------image/gif

Thunderbird: 
---multipart/mixed
------text/plain 
------message/rfc822
---------multipart/related (containing all parts of the original message)

IMP Webmail:
---multipart/mixed
------text/plain
------multipart/alternative
---------text/plain
---------text/html
---------image/gif
------text/html
------image/gif

I'm not sure which of these examples follows the "standard" (is there a
standard?). However, IMP's result seems to include an extra copy of each
part of the original message, and the original copy seems to show up as a
text/plain section when viewed. Is there improvement that can be made here
that would make IMP's forwarding behaviour more closely match that of
Outlook's (which seems to produce a pretty clean result)?

I took a look at ticket 3381, but most of the discussion there is too
technical for me so I can't tell if this issue is related to that one. I
also took a look through the release notes for v4.0.4+ (we're still on
4.0.3) but didn't see anything relating to this. If changes have been made
that address this issue please disregard. Thanks.