Ruby on Rails | Screencasts | Download | Documentation | Weblog | Community | Source

Ticket #7697 (new defect)

Opened 2 years ago

Last modified 9 months ago

[PATCH] perform_delivery_smtp and perform_delivery_sendmail should take sender into consideration.

Reported by: naoto Assigned to: core
Priority: normal Milestone:
Component: ActionMailer Version: edge
Severity: major Keywords:
Cc: pthomsen

Description

perform_delivery_smtp and perform_delivery_sendmail of ActionMailer uses mail.from as envelope-from of SMTP, but they should take it into consideration to use mail.sender if it exists. Attached patch makes it possilble to specify envelope-from (and also Sender header). This helps MTA to know where it should actually send error mails when errors occur.

Attachments

action_mailer_base_sender.diff (4.3 kB) - added by naoto on 03/02/07 14:52:02.

Change History

03/02/07 14:52:02 changed by naoto

  • attachment action_mailer_base_sender.diff added.

04/05/07 14:44:57 changed by naoto

  • type changed from enhancement to defect.

It should be dealt as defect that ActionMailer does not have any functionality to set envelope-from, so I've change the type of this ticket to defect.

07/25/07 20:05:23 changed by lifofifo

  • priority changed from high to normal.
  • severity changed from major to normal.

01/06/08 03:57:25 changed by naoto

  • severity changed from normal to major.

Wieh sending a mail with some ML address as from, and some error occurs while derivering it, an error mail will be sent back to the ML address, this is a nightmare!

01/15/08 02:40:35 changed by pthomsen

  • cc set to pthomsen.

Is this on the path to making it into mainline code?

I'm not sure how to move this forward, but I certainly want to be able to control the envelope-from as opposed to the From: header in the message.

As was said previously, this would enable the easy processing of bounces: I could put a user ID, or other identifying info in the envelope-from, so I know who bounced, when I get it back from MTA.

How can I help getting this into 2.0.x? The patch is non-intrusive, so existing functionality is not affected AFAIK.

01/15/08 06:04:04 changed by pthomsen

+1

Tested on 1.2.6. Don't have a running 2.0.2 right now. I will get it, if it is required.

01/15/08 08:27:49 changed by naoto

I've also tested on 2.0.2, which seems to work fine.

03/18/08 16:47:53 changed by joost

Dear pthomsen and naoto, and all others reading this.

Would it be posible for all of you to add a +1 comment to #7572? That ticked contains the same fix as the one posted here, plus added unit tests. It's only one vote away from being verified, after which I can close this ticket also and get this all folded into edge.

Thanks!