1. 25 Jul, 2006 8 commits
  2. 24 Jul, 2006 11 commits
  3. 23 Jul, 2006 15 commits
  4. 22 Jul, 2006 2 commits
  5. 21 Jul, 2006 4 commits
    • Brett Cannon's avatar
      Remove an XXX marker in a comment. · 468e45ed
      Brett Cannon authored
      468e45ed
    • Georg Brandl's avatar
      Fix check for empty list (vs. None). · 4085f149
      Georg Brandl authored
      4085f149
    • Barry Warsaw's avatar
      More RFC 2231 improvements for the email 4.0 package. As Mark Sapiro rightly · b110bad2
      Barry Warsaw authored
      points out there are really two types of continued headers defined in this
      RFC (i.e. "encoded" parameters with the form "name*0*=" and unencoded
      parameters with the form "name*0="), but we were were handling them both the
      same way and that isn't correct.
      
      This patch should be much more RFC compliant in that only encoded params are
      %-decoded and the charset/language information is only extract if there are
      any encoded params in the segments.  If there are no encoded params then the
      RFC says that there will be no charset/language parts.
      
      Note however that this will change the return value for Message.get_param() in
      some cases.  For example, whereas before if you had all unencoded param
      continuations you would have still gotten a 3-tuple back from this method
      (with charset and language == None), you will now get just a string.  I don't
      believe this is a backward incompatible change though because the
      documentation for this method already indicates that either return value is
      possible and that you must do an isinstance(val, tuple) check to discriminate
      between the two.  (Yeah that API kind of sucks but we can't change /that/
      without breaking code.)
      
      Test cases, some documentation updates, and a NEWS item accompany this patch.
      b110bad2
    • Neal Norwitz's avatar
      d12bd012