How to post good follow-ups to bug-followup@ ?

[Shaun Amott]

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 06:46:27AM -0700, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 07:13:04PM +0530, Ashish Shukla ???????????? ??????????????? wrote:
> > ...
> > > So either encoding them so they do get properly decoded, or ensuring
> > > that they remain as-is (no MIME encoding or claims of same) should do
> > > the trick.  I think I'd be more inclined toward the latter approach, if
> > > possible.
> > 
> > You mean, no quoted-printable attachments, but using 7bit
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding instead, hmm...?
> 
> I suspect that Fabian Keil's suggestion that the Web interface might
> have trouble with signed messages may well be on the mark.
> 

Signed messages shouldn't be a problem in principle, but that message
looks sufficiently dodgy to confuse the simplistic parser. The quoted
printable header also isn't caught, so the attachment doesn't get
decoded either.

I'll take a look when I get a chance... I've got some other (related)
fixes due too.

-- 
Shaun Amott // PGP: 0x6B387A9A
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin
of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson