Author Topic: Address format and multiple addresses in Reply-To and Bcc  (Read 5881 times)

Offline myfreexp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Address format and multiple addresses in Reply-To and Bcc
« on: March 11, 2012, 07:25:18 AM »
Hello Folks,

I'm new to RC and this forum. On our server, we're currently about to switch from Squirrel to RC and apparently have issues with the Reply-To and Bcc fields in the Identity settings:

  • If the user enters an address in the format "Real Name <local.part@do.main>" (without the quote signs, of course), RC is complaining about an invalid address (although the address is perfectly valid).
  • If multiple addresses are entered, separated with commas, RC is also complaining about an invalid address.
As a preliminary workaround, we could probably disable the validity test entirely. But where would we have to look at?

And has this been addressed in later versions of RC?

Any comments appreciated.

Regards, Michael
« Last Edit: April 05, 2012, 05:17:18 PM by SKaero »

Offline myfreexp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Address format and multiple addresses in Reply-To and Bcc
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2012, 03:21:18 PM »
Quote from: myfreexp;38381
  • If the user enters an address in the format "Real Name <local.part@do.main>" (without the quote signs, of course), RC is complaining about an invalid address (although the address is perfectly valid).

In the meantime I have managed to disable the validity check for Reply-to and Bcc in save_identity.inc. Now RC is not complaining about this valid format anymore and I can save the identity. But when I look into the settings again, I can see that RC removed the address in "<>" and just saved the real name.

I'm a former Turbo Pascal programmer, but my PHP skills are pretty poor. I wasn't able to find the function which does this string manipulation and apparently do not understand the logic. Can anybody help?

Quote from: myfreexp;38381
  • If multiple addresses are entered, separated with commas, RC is also complaining about an invalid address.

As I disabled the validity check, this is working now and I can enter more than just one address. But only as long as I do not use the format "Real Name <local.part@do.main>" (which I want to do badly).
« Last Edit: December 18, 2012, 07:49:36 AM by bpat1434 »

Offline SKaero

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,879
    • SKaero - Custom Roundcube development
Address format and multiple addresses in Reply-To and Bcc
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2012, 01:00:58 AM »
I tried in to do this in the newest version of RoundCube and it still doesn't work. You could do it with a plugin but I think it would be better as a core feature. Why don't you open up a feture request at Roundcube Webmail

Offline myfreexp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
Address format and multiple addresses in Reply-To and Bcc
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2012, 04:39:10 PM »
Quote from: skaero;38398
I tried in to do this in the newest version of RoundCube and it still doesn't work. You could do it with a plugin but I think it would be better as a core feature. Why don't you open up a feture request at Roundcube Webmail

I will probably do this, but as I need this for specific business purposes now, I can't wait until a developer will find the time to implement this "feature" (from my point of view it would be more a bug fix rather than a feature, as the format "Real Name " is perfectly valid and RC's complaint about an invalid address is just wrong). Plus that multiple addresses in Reply-to and Bcc are also perfectly compliant to RFC standards.

So I'm looking for a hack until this issue may be solved. If I can't find a hack, I'll have to stay with Squirrel (because Squirrel does have neither of these two problems). But that would be a real pity.

So if anybody can help with the code, this would be most appreciated (but I think I'd better post this to the dev mailing list?).

Anyway, thanks for the info that this issue is not addressed even in the newest version.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 04:41:32 PM by myfreexp »