On 07/07/14 03:49, Ricardo Signes wrote: > * Geoffrey Leach <ge...@hughes.net> [2014-07-05T18:30:19] >> I'm at work on MH.pm, which I hope to submit to CPAN as >> Email::LocalDelivery:MH.pm. The code is based on >> Email::LocalDelivery::Maildir.pm >> >> Question, in such a case is there a preference for maintaining the format, >> naming conventions, etc. of the original code? > I don't think it matters, as long as the interface is compatible. > > FWIW, I am soon going to abandon maintenance of Email::LocalDelivery. I only > have one line of code still using it. For all other things, I now use > Email::Sender. > I've just attempted to convert some code from using Email::LocalDelivery to Email::Sender, and I encountered two problems:
- Email::Sender is more dangerous: if through a programming error an undefined transport is passed to sendmail(), it will happily try to send the mail you were trying to save locally via SMTP. - Email::Sender::Transport::Mbox will not accept messages without a sender, whereas Email::LocalDelivery does allow this. Do you have any thoughts on how to overcome these two issues? Regards, -- Matijs
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
