Re: per-recipient configuration

2010-07-27 Thread David Nicol
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Ask Bjørn Hansen a...@develooper.com wrote: On Jul 25, 2010, at 2:43, Jared Johnson wrote: it will soon be hopelessly forked from normal QP on account of per-recipient config directives, etc. Having a common API for per-recipient things have long been on

Re: per-recipient configuration

2010-07-27 Thread Jared Johnson
My experience porting the Advenge SMTPD to be a qpsmtpd plug-in indicated that the current interface is entirely adequate for per-recipient things, as long as the plug-in manages its own persistence. I don't think any new hooks are required. On principal I'd agree that it's possible to do it

Re: per-recipient configuration

2010-07-27 Thread Jared Johnson
I assume you meant to CC the list originally, I've added it :) Could you show some code examples? not immediately, but sure What do you do with the queue plugin(s) if recipients ended up having different headers or bodies due to tagging etc.? Advenge only deals with deliver/defer with

Re: Rewritten URIBL plugin

2010-07-27 Thread Matt Sergeant
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, Jared Johnson wrote: The plugin has the following advantages over the original: - Uses MIME::Parser to unpack message text so that we can look for URI's in base64-encoded data, etc., and _not_ look for URI's in noise. I think we should probably consider putting support

Re: Rewritten URIBL plugin

2010-07-27 Thread Jared Johnson
I think we should probably consider putting support for parsed messages into core, with the parsing done lazily if requested by the API. It's a good idea, it's only that I haven't yet had the time and justification to write and to test a move from the plugin model (see the attached plugin in my

Re: Rewritten URIBL plugin

2010-07-27 Thread Jared Johnson
I think we should probably consider putting support for parsed messages into core, with the parsing done lazily if requested by the API. I forgot, we did kinda think of a couple of reasons not to want an API. depending on where you put it, you may find QP in general depending on MIME::Parser

Re: Rewritten URIBL plugin

2010-07-27 Thread Robert Spier
Jared Johnson wrote: I think we should probably consider putting support for parsed messages into core, with the parsing done lazily if requested by the API. I forgot, we did kinda think of a couple of reasons not to want an API. depending on where you put it, you may find QP in