On Jan 16, 2008 3:17 PM, Charles Lowe <aquasync / gmail.com> wrote:
> This is great news! No more action_mailer when all you really want is
> tmail.

Heh.. that's exactly how I got myself into the corner of becoming the
maintainer :)

> I wonder though - something I came up against before - is there a way to
> attach a large binary file (using ports?) without reading it in its
> entirety first? Ideally, you could just point the attachement to an IO
> object, set the associated filters (eg base64), and then get it to
> stream it to disk / smtp server.

Good idea.  Though TMail itself has no concept of SMTP or POP3 or any
other protocol really, it just handles the mail object headers really.
 Doesn't touch the body.

It makes sense, I guess we would have to give a TMail::Mail object to
be able to accept a Net::SMTP object and wrap it (much the same way we
do with TMail::Mail.load)

Have you played much with the ports area?  To be brutally honest, it
is something I am only starting to dive into, I have been
concentrating on getting all the existing tests passing (which they
all do now in trunk, for 1.9 and 1.8.6) and getting all the address
and header parsing working (which a lot more works now than it did
before) and finally documentation (there is a LOT more docs than there
was in 0.9).

Now that we have 1.9 compatibility wrapped I want to focus more on
adding more documentation and fixing any other bugs for the 1.2
branch.  But I would love a hand if you want to give it a shot.  We
need some more TMail developers I think :)

My ideal scene for TMail would be being able to just define the mail
object, give it a Net::SMTP connection and say "go send thyself" and
it handles the rest.

But need some more hands for that :)

Mikel