On Thu, 20 Nov 1997, Chris Newman wrote:
I understand the desire to protect users from their own stupidity, but I
really think this sort of check is better done in Sieve than in the
vacation extension itself. If we're assuming the majority of Sieve
scripts will be configured by MUAs, then the MUAs will probably get this
right if given proper guidance.
Ok; I guess I'll make the change. I think it makes sense to ask clients
that write scripts to try and write scripts in the following way:
if header "from" matches ("tjs(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu"
"tjs+*(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu") {
vacation;
}
I guess I'm blurring vacation with some of the more defective
autoresponders. With the changes you've suggested I guess even occasonial
misfires will be okay.
I might as well ask. I looked at the man page for Solaris vacation. Are
there any others that I should check out, or is it really the same across
Unix versions?
Thanks...
--
Tim Showalter
tjs(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu