On Nov 10, 2003, at 5:54 PM, Robert Spier wrote:
In a perfect world, there would be a Mail::SpamAssassin::SpamC, or something.. a lightweight perl equivalent of spamc, so we wouldn't have to re-implement it.
And so it wouldn't implode when they randomly break^H^H^H^H^H change the protocol. :-)
I think I'm convinced that using spamc is the way to go until someone makes Mail::SpamAssassin::SpamC.
- ask
-- http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/
