X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/cddc335b2bd98a302b261200c12d61b05476d727..c02f9d224cb78a3ad880cb749ef4a11eadfad79a:/doc/todo/passwordauth:_sendmail_interface.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/todo/passwordauth:_sendmail_interface.mdwn b/doc/todo/passwordauth:_sendmail_interface.mdwn
index 4bbda6565..556240964 100644
--- a/doc/todo/passwordauth:_sendmail_interface.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/passwordauth:_sendmail_interface.mdwn
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-[[tag wishlist]]
+[[!tag wishlist plugins/passwordauth]]
 
 For sending out password reminder emails, the [[plugins/passwordauth]] plugin currently uses
 the *[Mail::Sendmail](http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?Mail::Sendmail)* module.
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ in the ikiwiki source code, where emailing is done.
 
 --[[tschwinge]]
 
-> One that is in Debian is [[cpan Email::Send]], which can do SMTP and
+> One that is in Debian is [[!cpan Email::Send]], which can do SMTP and
 > sendmail and some other methods and falls back through methods until one
 > succeeds. I haven't tried to use it but it looks like a feasable
 > candidate.
@@ -34,13 +34,13 @@ in the ikiwiki source code, where emailing is done.
 
 OK, so I'll have a look at replacing all email handling with *Email::Send*.
 
-[[tag patch]]
-*<http://www.thomas.schwinge.homeip.net/tmp/ikiwiki-sendmail.patch>*
+[[!tag patch]]
+*<http://schwinge.homeip.net/~thomas/tmp/ikiwiki-sendmail.patch>*
 
 Remaining TODOs:
 
   * Resolve TODOs as denoted inside the patch.
-  * Is it worthwhile to use and depend on [[cpan Return::Value]]
+  * Is it worthwhile to use and depend on [[!cpan Return::Value]]
     just for this bit of functionality?
   * Debian news file.
   * ikiwiki news file.
@@ -52,3 +52,10 @@ Remaining TODOs:
 > lost it. --[[Joey]]
 
 Resent.  --[[tschwinge]]
+
+> Debian now has Mail::Sender, Mail::SendEasy, and Email::Sender
+> (which, according to its dpkg description, "replaces the old and sometimes
+> problematic Email::Send library, which did a decent job at handling very
+> simple email sending tasks, but was not suitable for serious use, for a
+> variety of reasons"). Are any of those any better? It's unfortunate that
+> there doesn't seem to be a clear "best practice"... --[[smcv]]