Danny Angus wrote:
> > That isn't part of the Mailet API at all, and doesn't belong there IMO.
In
> > JAMES, we have pluggable in-protocol handlers that are connected to such
> > events. I do not know that anyone wants to standardize on our
in-protocol
> > plug-in architecture, which we're still evolving, but that seems
separate
> > from Mailets.
> I agree that it is separate from mailets, but theres no reason why it
> couldn't be another independant API which others could implement
Absolutely. My point is not to conflate the two separate APIs.
--- Noel
