On 14.02.19 09:00, Piers via luv-main wrote:
> 
> > I'm all for a good excuse for hacking a script, but a long-solved
> > problem isn't such a use case.
> > 
> > Erik
> > 
> 
> Thanks Erik,
> 
> The software is part of a LAMP stack and is used to import documents from
> attachments into a CRM and attach them to people's records, convert them to
> text, index them and them parse them for data.
> 
> I am sure fetchmail does a great job for your purposes but the IMAP
> connection is only the tip of the ice berg so jumping out of the LAMP stack
> for something that is already part of PHP would increase the complexity
> unnecessarily tho.

Your problems are not the first time that poor task partitioning has
made life more difficult. If you were to let fetchmail efficiently and
problem-free handle mail delivery, then you only have to either:

1) Pick the mail out of the inbox in your script(s), or
2) deliver each mail directly to a converting filter if your pipeline
   prefers that, and can buffer adequately.

To attempt to mix up post-arrival grist milling with mail delivery makes
no sense, I suggest. An inbox makes a fine buffer between the two
temporally disconnected activities, each with its own fluctuating data
rate, but any buffer will do.

In the past I have scripted a similar system. Received emails had
attachments stripped, passed through the grist mill, and reports
forwarded to appropriate recipients. I let mail utilities handle mail,
and kept the back end as a separate back end. Easy to test, and easy to
keep working.

Erik
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to