Re: [PEPr] Comment on Mail::Mail_Admin

Till, > Maybe that too - I was more after, if the Postfix "driver" would be a > seperate package later on, but I guess your other replies made that > obvious now. :) Separating drivers into packages makes sense as soon as there are 10+ drivers IMO. > I think the distinction is common, but it does not really make any > sense. ;-) At least in my opinion, it makes more sense from a user > perspective to just say "mailboxes" and then your mailbox can be > forwarded (alias, forward) or picked up (-> to mbox/maildir). Yes, this is from user perspective. But handling "hidden" mail boxes that are only aggregators for multiple addresses, or addresses that redirect to several other ones is hard to deal with a simple user scheme. In the application I needed the package for I did exactly this - allow the user to choose between a normal mailbox or a redirection to a different address. But an API allow deeper modifications. > CGPro works the same way, atmail as well. Exim, Qmail etc.. too. CGPro > and atmail are the only commercial packages I have experience with. Good. > I like to have things on Mail_Admin_Driver_Postfix_* - but that's my > personal preference. Is your question regarding "looks" or more in > regard to implementation? From an implementation perspective, class names are exchangable. But I'd like to hear how other packages do it (or which way is recommended). -- Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen Christian Weiske

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] signature.asc