From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9B6D82EFE
 for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  1 Dec 2021 19:19:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9CCE51132E
 for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  1 Dec 2021 19:19:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 447B21131F
 for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  1 Dec 2021 19:19:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1837C468F4
 for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed,  1 Dec 2021 19:19:14 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <9281a5b1-58e3-da1a-b121-99aa7c45d3cc@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 19:19:13 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/95.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Stoiko Ivanov <s.ivanov@proxmox.com>, Mira Limbeck <m.limbeck@proxmox.com>
Cc: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20211201154158.322637-1-m.limbeck@proxmox.com>
 <20211201154158.322637-2-m.limbeck@proxmox.com>
 <20211201191354.455de4d0@rosa.proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211201191354.455de4d0@rosa.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 1.076 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -1.977 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pmg-devel] applied: [PATCH api] fix #3758: allow empty `to` in
 noqueue case
X-BeenThere: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Mail Gateway development discussion
 <pmg-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pmg-devel>, 
 <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pmg-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pmg-devel>, 
 <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 18:19:14 -0000

On 01.12.21 19:13, Stoiko Ivanov wrote:
> Applied and tested with a problematic log.

could make sense to add such one to the regression test harness?