Skip Menu |

Preferred bug tracker

Please visit the preferred bug tracker to report your issue.

This queue is for tickets about the Email-MIME CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 14023
Status: rejected
Priority: 0/
Queue: Email-MIME

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: tallison [...] tacocat.net
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: Wishlist
Broken in: 1.82
Fixed in: (no value)



Subject: MIME::Tools
Simply a wishlist item. After testing approximately 70,000 email messages of a variety of formats, including 9,000 spam (I consider these to be my toughest formats) I found that use of MIME::Tools was more reliable than the current EMail::MIME (based on Encoding.pm) set of modules in parsing email messages correctly without throwing errors. After making some of my own patches on Email::MIME::Modifier.pm 233,239d232 < # TAA < # there is definitely a failure at this point. < # This is a patch I've applied to the code until it's < # fixed in CPAN < return if $#$parts < 0; < # END TAA < I was able to get most messages decoded correctly but got stuck on decoding the text of various mail header subject lines. MIME::Tools is ~10 years old and still actively maintained. My WishList item is that Email::MIME be realigned with the MIME::Tools architecture because of it's robust performance. After working with these tools I believe that this will give Email::MIME a solid foundation from which to build upon.
Show quoted text
> My WishList item is that Email::MIME be realigned with the MIME::Tools > architecture because of it's robust performance. After working > with these tools I believe that this will give Email::MIME a solid > foundation from which to build upon.
I have no idea what this means. Realigned? Huh? I agree that Email::MIME should be at least as reliable as MIME::Tools. Is that all you're saying? -- rjbs
? -- rjbs