[geeks] Email experts?

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Wednesday, January 9, 2002 at 12:19:19 (-0500), s at avoidant.org wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: [geeks] Email experts?
>
> Care to expound on why? I've never considered using it on the sending
> side before now, but see no reason it wouldn't work. I'm not stuck on
> using it, it just happened to be the first thing that came to mind.

Procmil has entirely different design goals and features than what are
needed.  Even if it were a gem of perfection inside and out it would not
make a very good mail transport system, or even an effective component
in an MTA.

> > How to properly sovle Big Endian's problem depends on many factors not
> > described above.
> 
> Yes, but I think we define "properly" differently. I've been known to
> leave all sorts of things in place that you'd likely call sloppy,
> kludgy, half-baked, and/or any number of other assorted derogatory
> terms. Some of them sit and do their sloppy, kludgy, half-baked jobs for
> years without a hiccup. Perhaps there's a better way, but I got the job
> done...

Big Endian says the job isn't being done "properly" now.  Whether it can
be done properly with a kludge or no is irrelevant, though I suspect
he's pushing the envelope of whatever he's got to work with and
therefore there's probably very little room for kludgy half-baked
solutions that will do the job properly.

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;  <gwoods at acm.org>;  <g.a.woods at ieee.org>;  <woods at robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods at planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods at weird.com>