Comment on attachment 8805031
Don't claim we are done when we failed
Review of attachment 8805031:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I've looked at this now and I think Kent's solution to separate the setting of m_sendDone from SendQuit() is simple and transparent. Alex, where did you plan to set 'm_nextStateAfterResponse'?
::: mailnews/compose/src/nsSmtpProtocol.cpp
@@ +606,5 @@
> NS_ENSURE_SUCCESS(rv, rv);
> bool verifyingLogon = false;
> smtpUrl->GetVerifyLogon(&verifyingLogon);
> + if (verifyingLogon) {
> + m_sendDone = true; // We did what we were attempting.
Please move the inline comment above the line like this:
// Just verifying the ability to logon was done/succeeded(?)
// so we pretend the send (which we didn't do) was
// a success.
m_sendDone = true;
Comment on attachment 8805031
Don't claim we are done when we failed
Review of attachment 8805031: ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --
-------
I've looked at this now and I think Kent's solution to separate the setting of m_sendDone from SendQuit() is simple and transparent. Alex, where did you plan to set 'm_nextStateAft erResponse' ?
::: mailnews/ compose/ src/nsSmtpProto col.cpp SUCCESS( rv, rv); >GetVerifyLogon (&verifyingLogo n);
@@ +606,5 @@
> NS_ENSURE_
> bool verifyingLogon = false;
> smtpUrl-
> + if (verifyingLogon) {
> + m_sendDone = true; // We did what we were attempting.
Please move the inline comment above the line like this:
// Just verifying the ability to logon was done/succeeded(?)
// so we pretend the send (which we didn't do) was
// a success.
m_sendDone = true;