Hai, I agree what would be nice if someone who has some extra time helped us merge, add examples update the docbook since both party's are busy at the moment with other projects. Else it has to wait a little until either party has some extra time. It also means that the new 'email' system needs to 'break' with the old model since we need to redesign the object model (my guess). Personally im in favour for this anyway since i think backw. comp. is unwanted in this case since its a seperate extention/app anyway.
Daniel. >-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gerard van Enk >Verzonden: woensdag 30 juli 2003 23:29 >Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Onderwerp: Re: Hack: receiving mail with MMBase > > >Michiel Meeuwissen wrote: >> Johannes Verelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>For a project I'm on I wrote some code that makes MMBase act as an SMTP >>>server (yes, it implements RFC 2821: but only those commands strictly >>>necessary for a compliant implementation). It will listen to a >>>configurable port and receive emails that are given to it. These emails >>>are parsed and put in MMBase objects. The code is fully configurable: >>>_everything_ can be changed in the module XML (see below). >> >> >> Wel if _everything_ can be configured, I think any body could be happy. >> > >:) > >> I'd be +1 adding it to the 'email hack', though I'd also agree >letting the desicion simply to this >> hack's maintainer. > >I think it's best to integrate this with Daniel's email hack, no >additional votes required. > >Gerard > > >
