Defect #37705

Move to modern authentication(OAuth 2.0) from IMAP for receiving email in Redmine.

Added by mis org 3 days ago. Updated 2 days ago.

Status:ClosedStart date:
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:

0%

Category:-
Target version:-
Resolution:Duplicate Affected version:

Description

Hello,

Microsoft is going to disable IMAP authentication to read emails from Office365. I need to use modern authentication to read/receive emails.
Currently, I am using IMAP to receive email into Redmine.

[root@redmine-01 config]# rake redmine:email:receive_imap RAILS_ENV="production" host=outlook.office365.com port=993 username= password=Luk92898 unknown_user=accept unknown_user=create --trace ssl=true unknown_user=accept no-permission-check=1
Your Gemfile lists the gem redmine_crm (>= 0) more than once.
You should probably keep only one of them.
Remove any duplicate entries and specify the gem only once.
While it's not a problem now, it could cause errors if you change the version of one of them later.
(in /var/www/redmine-4.2.2)
  • Invoke redmine:email:receive_imap (first_time)
  • Invoke environment (first_time)
  • Execute environment
  • Execute redmine:email:receive_imap
    rake aborted!
    Net::IMAP::NoResponseError: LOGIN failed.
    /usr/local/rvm/rubies/ruby-2.7.2/lib/ruby/2.7.0/net/imap.rb:1220:in `get_tagged_response'
    /usr/local/rvm/rubies/ruby-2.7.2/lib/ruby/2.7.0/net/imap.rb:1274:in `block in send_command'
    /usr/local/rvm/rubies/ruby-2.7.2/lib/ruby/2.7.0/monitor.rb:202:in `synchronize'
    /usr/local/rvm/rubies/ruby-2.7.2/lib/ruby/2.7.0/monitor.rb:202:in `mon_synchronize'

Related issues

Duplicates Redmine - Defect #37688: Move to modern authentication(OAuth 2.0) from IMAP for re... New

History

#1 Updated by Marius BALTEANU 2 days ago

  • Duplicates Defect #37688: Move to modern authentication(OAuth 2.0) from IMAP for receiving email in Redmine. added

#2 Updated by Marius BALTEANU 2 days ago

  • Status changed from New to Closed
  • Resolution set to Duplicate

Thanks for reporting this issue. Closing in favour of #37688.

Also available in: Atom PDF