[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Multiple actions in Sieve script.

1999-01-26 15:42:50
At 10:30 PM -0800 1/25/99, Ned Freed wrote:

[M]y problem is more with people assuming that fileinto is even possible

FileInto is optional.  (It has to be, for example, for POP environments.)

I have a far bigger problem with the notion that somebody advanced of having
multiple keeps deliver multiple copies of a message. This is unimplementable
more often than not, as quite a few delivery schemes do duplicate address
elimination, duplicate message elimination, or both. I cannot support such
semantics, and I doubt I'm alone in this.

I don't think it makes sense (it isn't desirable) for multiple keeps to be different than a single keep.

As for the notion of removing keep as a default action, been there, done that. The first mail filtering language I ever did started out this way. Simply put, it was an unmitigated disaster. Default actions may be grotty, but they are an
essential safety net that the language has to have.

I do agree that the rule needs to be that the default is only taken when no
other action of any sort, not just ones on a short list, has been.

So if a script only does a reply, is the message kept or discarded? Neither is specified, so one has to be the default action.

What's wrong with saying that some actions affect delivery status, and other actions don't? Actions that affect delivery status are: keep, discard, forward, reject. Actions that don't are: reply, mark (if this extension is supported).

Then, we can say that the default delivery status is keep.