Re: rolling uribl and rbl plugins into a single plugin

Jared Johnson wrote:
> So our organization is planning doing some big changes to the rbl plugin
> and it dawned on us that it seems a lot easier to just add an earlier hook
> to the existing uribl plugin (and rename it to rbl?  or bl? or
> something?).  But of course I still have in mind that someday I'll get the
> plugin completely in shape and it will be in QP, and we'll get to share
> code and all.  Would this be an undesirable direction to take the uribl
> plugin in for QP proper, in the event that the uribl plugin was integrated
> into QP proper?  It seems like it would be handy in terms of both code
> organization and features (the main feature I can think of is proper mask
> evaluation along with custom actions per mask, just like in the uribl
> plugin).
>
> Thoughts?
>    
I'd much prefer they both used plugin inheritance to access shared code 
than have them merged.