On 1/18/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think our goal is to share as most handler-api code as possible. So why we should not try to create an handler-api which fit all needs (POP3,IMAP,SMTP....) ? In SMTP it is called fastfail but there are also needs for plugin "hooks" in POP3 or other protocols. For the POP-Before-SMTP stuff. I modifed the core POP3 handler in trunk to let it work. With a pluggable hook api i had manage this by hook in the right code ;-)
I don't think our goal should be to share the code, it should be to create correct, good, implementations and reuse code only where it is appropriate. Just because POP & IMAP bear a passing resemblance to SMTP it is not necessarily true that a detailed analysis of the requirements for each one will result in a common requirement. For instance at the most trivial level SMTP is about decision making and accepting messages whereas POP is about retrieving them I don't know that this makes a difference but it *might* and until we have done the analysis we have to be open to that possibility. d. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
