Details
-
Improvement
-
Status: Closed
-
Minor
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Nightly Builds
-
None
-
None
-
Operating System: other
Platform: Other
-
18968
Description
A patch providing "bounce address" support for Email.java, as discussed in the msg copied below. Patch also "clones" System.properties rather than setting properties upon it directly.
At 6:04 PM -0500 4/10/03, Quinton McCombs wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> From: Joe Germuska Joe@Germuska.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 3:15 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: [email] email bounce address?
>
>
> I'm interested in porting some of my email projects to use the
> commons-email package. However, there is one thing I'm accustomed to
> using that isn't supported.
>
> Sometimes my system needs to send an email from a certain user, but
> if the message bounces, I need the bounce to go to another address
> instead of to the sender. It turns out that the way to do this is to
> set the "mail.smtp.from" property in the Session object before
> sending a message.
>
> It looks like adding this would be no big deal, since a new Session
> is created every time a message is sent. So if people support
> adding this functionality, it would be as simple as defining another
> property on the Email object (like "bounceAddress"), and then if that
> property isn't null, to set "mail.smtp.from" in the properties used
> to create a new session in getMailSession().
>
> Looking at that code, I suppose that one might just set this value as
> a system property, but especially since the mechanism is kind of
> obscure, it might make the code easier for people to use if it were
> more explicit. Also, it seems kind of transient and
> more-appropriately set per-message than globally in the System
> properties.
>
> Which brings up just one other thing: in getMailSession(), there are
> calls to System.setProperty(). This makes me a little uncomfortable;
> is there any reason not to make a new Properties based off of
> System.getProperties, and then to set the values on a more transient
> object?
>
> Opinions?
All of this sounds good to me.