Message 112752 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	terry.reedy
Recipients	barry, jcea, msapiro, terry.reedy
Date	2010-08-04.04:19:05
SpamBayes Score	0.0043071113
Marked as misclassified	No
Message-id	<1280895548.26.0.434314882286.issue5713@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
Smptlib is documented as RFC821/1869 based. So this is a request for a new feature. I presume more would be required to bring it up to 2821/5321. Assuming so, what is the rationale for adding just one new feature. This would mean tacking something like "and RFC 2821 for 421 status" on the end of "For details of SMTP and ESMTP operation, consult RFC 821 (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) and RFC 1869 (SMTP Service Extensions)." Can a test be written for this? There seem to be some coded status tests already. I

Smptlib is documented as RFC821/1869 based. So this is a request for a new feature. I presume more would be required to bring it up to 2821/5321. Assuming so, what is the rationale for adding just one new feature. This would mean tacking something like "and RFC 2821 for 421 status" on the end of "For details of SMTP and ESMTP operation, consult RFC 821 (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) and RFC 1869 (SMTP Service Extensions)."

Can a test be written for this? There seem to be some coded status tests already.

I

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2010-08-04 04:19:08	terry.reedy	set	recipients: + terry.reedy, barry, jcea, msapiro
2010-08-04 04:19:08	terry.reedy	set	messageid: <1280895548.26.0.434314882286.issue5713@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-08-04 04:19:06	terry.reedy	link	issue5713 messages
2010-08-04 04:19:05	terry.reedy	create