Quoting Jan Schneider <j...@horde.org>:
Zitat von Eric Jon Rostetter <eric.rostet...@physics.utexas.edu>:
Quoting Lloyd Zusman <l...@asfast.com>:
But this proposed "prereply" hook would be equally generic as
"postlogin", "postsent", "signature", and most of the other hooks that
already exist. People can write whatever code they want for these
existing hooks. Why would mine be any different?
I see the argument for including the code to support the hook, but not
provide his actual hook code... Then people who do want a pre-reply hook
would be able to write one (say, maybe it checks for replies to known
phishing addresses, or something else potentially useful).
We always provide examples, for a good reason. If we are going to add
that hook, we should find a useful example. If we don't find one, then
the hook doesn't make sense to me.
I agree with Jan. Just like we don't provide a preference setting for
*every* setting that may exist, we aren't going to provide a hook at
all possible entry points in the code. The code is open source - for
the obtuse cases the code can be added if needed.
michael
--
___________________________________
Michael Slusarz [slus...@horde.org]
--
IMP mailing list - Join the hunt: http://horde.org/bounties/#imp
Frequently Asked Questions: http://horde.org/faq/
To unsubscribe, mail: imp-unsubscr...@lists.horde.org
