grepmail : grep program for mailboxes. Currently only supports mbox
format.
Not sure about the last one. Do/can we register namespaces for scripts?
what about grepmbox instead? you can always go to grepmail when you
support other formats (like mail spool for instance)
Cheers,Nadim.
Title: RE: New module Mail::SendEasy
But my point is not to rag on about Mail::Box, or any other
mail handling
module. It's to write smaller, cleaner, single purpose ones.
Hey, Email::MIME
came out the other day. Comments welcome.
Ill have a look at some point. It will be interesting
Sorry, I'm not on the list, but got this passed on...
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:49:29 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: New module Mail::SendEasy
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yves Orton) writes:
Besides this is there really any reason for yet another
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Terrence Brannon wrote:
- it seems that instead of volunteers to ease the burden of your API
usage/docs, people are trying to pull the rug out from under you by
populating the Email::* hierarchy... oh well.
I hope you're not including me here. My comments were intended
Mark Overmeer wrote:
Mail::Box was designed to start with EVERYTHING which the RFCs specify,
and ALL uses I know with e-mail. A very high level library. And that's
quite a lot... And therefore suffers all the same problems as other
large modules (like Tk) have: they are hard to understand when
Phew... Only one comment: KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)
This is WAY too confusing! No one will be able to figure it out, or
want to. What we have now is not really that broken, especially if one
regression tests his applications when new versions of modules are
installed.
Actually, we build
At 02:12 -0600 1/28/04, Dave Rolsky wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Terrence Brannon wrote:
I also tend to agree with him that Mail::Box is a bit over-engineered in
the OO department. Do you _really_ need _eleven_ classes for
Mail::Message::Field, which in turn are presumably used by the _nine_
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
At 02:12 -0600 1/28/04, Dave Rolsky wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Terrence Brannon wrote:
I also tend to agree with him that Mail::Box is a bit over-engineered in
the OO department. Do you _really_ need _eleven_ classes for
Mark Overmeer wrote:
OTOH, it _does_ do basically everything you'd ever want for mail
handling/sending, and if you want to do something complex, it'll do that
that.
That is one of the differences in concept. I prefer libraries to provide
a high
