RE: [PEAR-DEV] Package proposal: Mail_Mime (alternative)

> From: Heino H. Gehlsen [mailto:heino@gehlsen.dk] > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 3:13 PM > In my opinion it's clear, that the focus ought to be on the entity and not > on the parser or composer - and this is why I ended up writing a new > package! Sounds like good reasoning. > If a merge is what it comes to cooperation with the maintainers of > Mail_Mime > is of course the best way of handling such a thing ;-). > Until 'the list' has spoken I'll think of it as two unrelated packages... > > But maybe if we agree that the new features are necessary it would be a > > good idea to develop a replacement package with BC API instead of > > "trying to turn around all the internas" of the current package. > > If my package were actually to 'replace' the current Mail_Mime, which have > never been my intention, I think making a subclass that adds the backward > compatibility would be best. > > On the other hand, whats the problem of having a simple Mail_Mime and an > advanced Mail_MimeAdvanced package ? It sounds to me like there are no benefits of Mail_Mime than compared to Mail_MimeAdvanced? The way you were explaing the changes the performance would even be better in your package (correct me if I misunderstood you?). If all that you add is power flexibility and possibly even better performance while being able to maintain almost complete BC it sounds like a prime candidate for a new major version jump for Mail_Mime. Of course this needs to be decided by the maintainers of Mail_Mime. Regards, Lukas