[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#964847: reportbug/mailer.py: xdg-email MUA encodes mailto URL instead of using xdg-email command-line parameters



Package: python3-reportbug
Version: 7.7.0
Severity: normal
File: /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/reportbug/mailer.py

The xdg-email MUA maps to the Mailto class, but the Mailto class fully
encodes the Mailto URL, while xdg-email takes command-line parameters
for the CC, BCC, Subject, mail body and attachments. I suggest that
the xdg-email MUA option should use the command-line parameters
instead, since xdg-email could do things differently for MUAs that have
better mechanisms than mailto: for passing items to their composers.
For example some MUAs could support long mail bodies via xdg-email but
not via mailto: URLs.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
  APT prefers testing-debug
  APT policy: (900, 'testing-debug'), (900, 'testing'), (850, 'buildd-testing-proposed-updates'), (800, 'unstable-debug'), (800, 'unstable'), (790, 'buildd-unstable'), (700, 'experimental-debug'), (700, 'experimental'), (690, 'buildd-experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 5.7.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_AU.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_AU.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_AU:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages python3-reportbug depends on:
ii  apt                2.1.7
ii  file               1:5.38-5
ii  python3            3.8.2-3
ii  python3-apt        2.1.3
ii  python3-debian     0.1.37
ii  python3-debianbts  3.0.2
ii  python3-requests   2.23.0+dfsg-2
ii  sensible-utils     0.0.12+nmu1

python3-reportbug recommends no packages.

Versions of packages python3-reportbug suggests:
ii  reportbug  7.7.0

-- no debconf information

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: