Message#from_yaml results in invalid parts when body is not present

[angelcarballo]

Found this behaviour while testing serialization and deserialization of messages via YAML.

The following spec fails (at least on master and 2.6.4)

context 'when body is not present' do
  it 'should encode after deserializing' do
    message = Mail::Message.new(
      to: 'someone@somewhere.com',
      cc: 'someoneelse@somewhere.com',
      bcc: 'someonesecret@somewhere.com',
      subject: 'subject'
    )
    serialized = message.to_yaml
    deserialized = Mail::Message.from_yaml(serialized)
    expect{ deserialized.encoded }.not_to raise_error
  end
end

The #from_yaml method sets @body directly, which after YAML serialization will contain an Array on parts instead of a PartList instance.

Is this a bug, or it's the expected behaviour (making the body mandatory) ?

[jeremy]

>> Mail::Message.from_yaml(Mail.new.to_yaml).encoded
ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 1, expected 0)
    from /Users/jeremy/source/mail/lib/mail/message.rb:1801:in `sort!'

ಠ_ಠ

[jeremy]

Caused by #782

[dragosmiron]

still failing on 2.7.0 @jeremy

[jeremy]

@dragosmiron Expected; thanks for the report. Pull requests welcome 😊

[dragosmiron]

But the fix is above in the PR, and in master, just not in a release yet. Any idea when the next release might be? We had to fork the gem to benefit from your 'master' code

[jeremy]

@dragosmiron Got a link to the fix you're referencing?

[dragosmiron]

#1148

[jeremy]

But the fix is above in the PR, and in master, just not in a release yet.

#1148 was not merged to master. The PR is a workaround for a symptom of the problem, not a fix for the underlying issue, so it was closed as a duplicate of this issue.

[dragosmiron]

cool, #1148 is good enough until this is somehow fixed, so we had to fork the gem.

[dragosmiron]

hello, two years later, has this issue or the one from #1148 been fixed?

[dragosmiron]

also, why don't we merge #1148 ? we've been running for 2 years on a fork of that with no more issues because of this error. has development stalled?