>To clarify, I'm not suggesting dropping the CMU SASL support. >What I meant to say is that we should include a light weight SASL >implementation as I described that would be built iff CMU SASL support >was not enabled in the build.
I don't necessarily object to someone doing that work ... it's just a) more work than I think you realize, given that we already have CMU SASL support and it would have to integrate with that somehow, and b) I think nowadays getting a CMU SASL library is not a big deal for most platforms (it either ships with a lot of systems or is easily available via a packaging system). So if someone wants to work on it, please feel free. It's just not something that will make it onto my personal to-do list. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
