[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] XOAUTH2 integration, and a few questions

From: Ken Hornstein
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] XOAUTH2 integration, and a few questions
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:21:38 -0400

>Document where?  If they are internal, it's for a reason, no?  Don't
>cast an API in granite if there is no need.  But certainly the source
>code should talk about what's going on.

I think the API has already been cast?

Here's my thinking.  We support postproc and have for a while, yes?  To
write your own postproc you need to know what the various undocumented
switches are, so your postproc can at least know how to deal with them
(you need to handle some of them special, and at a minimum you need to
know which ones take an argument).

This means to write an effective postproc you need to read the source
code to understand what is going on.  This is a pain in the ass.  I've
done that already, and it makes me wonder ... why is this crap not
written down?  I mean, if there is an interface why do you have to trawl
through the source code to use it effectively?  I'd hate to have to make
someone else waste a day trying to understand what -idanno does.  And
maybe someone will think of something cool to do with it that I never
thought of.

Looking at the complete list of undocumented switches, I really didn't
understand the reasons for them all being that way.  Like, -server
was undocumented for a long time; why?

And we've changed the API, actually; a bunch of switches were garbage
collected a long time ago.  To me this is more about documenting how
the world works.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]