[Top] [All Lists]

Re: draft-degener-sieve-editheader-01.txt; "refuse" action

2004-01-20 14:53:49

On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 11:49:11AM -0800, Matthew Elvey (FM) wrote:
I'd like to see this go away:

  A message modified by addheader or deleteheader MUST NOT
  be considered the same as the original message unless it
  matches the original message exactly.

At this point, I'd like to throw this out as well.  Anyone have
a compelling reason not to?

Personally, I'd like it to be replaced by an explicit statement
saying that these added headers do *not* make the message different.

Should we say that
[ ] the first fileinto wins, say that
[ ] any one fileinto may win (but it has to be one of
    the actual fileintos - can't have just half the
    headers or additional headers),
[ ] the last fileinto wins,
[ ] or leave it completely open?

I'd like one of the first three -- I think if it is one of the
fourth, it starts weakening the connection between message modification
and message use, and I'd like that connection to be a strong one.

I'd like to see replaceheader reconsidered for the spec, or at least any 
objections to it made public; the standards-setting process must be public.

As I remember it, Ned Freed was vocal and clear on the list about his
intention to do everything in his powers to stop replaceheader, to
general mumbling approval.  Maybe I misinterpreted something?