Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of
 SRS0=2sQ49oh1=OQ=Germuska.com=Joe@jgsullivan.com designates 64.108.230.132 as
 permitted sender)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a06200708bdd24ccb79e6@[192.168.2.93]>
In-Reply-To: <3e1257da0411300730483693c2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3e1257da041129082547cd48b5@mail.gmail.com>	
 <PKENIMMEAHDAHILNLIJPGEPNHIAB.epugh@upstate.com>	
 <e8bc90dc04112919382dd57d5d@mail.gmail.com>	
 <3e1257da041130013212996067@mail.gmail.com>	
 <e8bc90dc041130043529207a39@mail.gmail.com>	
 <a062007ffbdd2312c01c4@192.168.2.93>
 <3e1257da0411300730483693c2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:28:51 -0600
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
From: Joe Germuska <Joe@Germuska.com>
Subject: Re: [email] batch sending (was Re: [email] Exceptions)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="============_-1110290265==_ma============"
Received-SPF: pass (blade3.jgsullivan.com: 68.79.151.2 is authenticated by a
 trusted mechanism)
Original-Mail-From: joe@germuska.com

--============_-1110290265==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

>But only having a send method in the email class could fall short of
>making the mail api easier to use. As the requirement for bulk emails
>is a common one, shouldn't there be a way to do this under commons
>email?

All I'm saying is that all the requirements I've had for bulk emails 
(and I've had a few such projects) have required more than I think is 
fitting for commons-email.  I've never had a need to send exactly the 
same message to a list of addresses in a way which wasn't better 
handled either by including the list of addresses on a single message 
or by using an external mailing list management system.  If I were a 
mail server admin, I'd rather have you send a single message with a 
long recipient list (in the BCC if necessary) than send identical 
copies of the same message over and over again.

I also think that no matter how self-evident you feel the handling 
for logging and reporting are, these will be things on which other 
people have other opinions.  This may be a better candidate for 
sample code, either in an "examples" area of CVS, in the xdocs, or in 
the Wiki.  Ultimately, I probably wouldn't veto something like this, 
but I don't think it's extremely compelling either.

Joe

-- 
Joe Germuska            
Joe@Germuska.com  
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction"  -The Ex
--============_-1110290265==_ma============--