Rick Widmer wrote:
> Robin Bowes wrote:
>> Having thought about this some more, I think that a better approach
>> would be to have both pre- and post- hooks for each action and to call a
>> separate script for each hook.
> This has some possibilities.  There would be an advantage if most of the
> hooks were empty, and a liability if there was a lot of duplicate code.
>  It would require several identical files to support John's existing
> setup.  I'm happy with a single script and a switch() on the command
> that was executed.

If you have duplicate code you would just symlink a single script
containing your switch() statement - best of both worlds!

> I would still argue that the hooks should match the calls in the vopmail
> api, and not an arbitrary subset of the operations within them.

Why? Why not make the hooks reflect the "useful" operations rather than
just what goes in internal to vpopmail?

>> Why not just store the whole .qmail as a multi-line text object?
> The biggest problem, it would break every program that currently updates
> valias entries.  The other minor detail, can every back end support it?
>   I don't know.  I use CDB, test mysql and pgsql, and can't even list
> all the other back ends off the top of my head.  I have no idea how you
> would implement valias in them, and I don't believe any of them have it
> yet.  There is very little interest in keeping them current with the big
> three.  They usually get updated just enough to scratch the itch of the
> person who contributes a patch...  unless you want it bad enough to pay.
>  Inter7 and Tom Collins will both do sponsored work that usually finds
> its way back into the distribution.

It was just an idea - I don't know the details of the code.


Reply via email to