On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 08:38:29AM -0700, Tom Samplonius wrote:
> Uhh.. no. c-client is the standard API, and the reference standard for
> the MBX access routines and format. Why re-write/re-invent the wheel? The
> whole point of APIs is to hide the bare metal details from the application
> and make the application immune from any future changes. Exim's MBX driver
> already has issues, that it wouldn't have if it linked c-client instead.
We are going depp into personal taste and philosophy here. This is
getting OT.
My personal view is that c-client (the codebase) is a steaming pile of
dog poo.
My no-so-personal opinion is that things like file formats should not
(in fact must not) be closely coupled to implementation. If the file
format and the access methods cannot be consistently described in a
programming-language INDEPENDENT manner then the designers/writers
are just using an excuse to hide poor implementation and
non-interoperability.
This doesn't even begin to touch on the issues of compatibility of
code licensing etc.
As I say, I have not seen any problems with exim. Since we are on an
exim mailing list, perhaps you could dicuss how we should fix any
potential problems that you have seen ?
--
Peter Galbavy
Knowledge Matters Ltd
http://www.knowledge.com/
