Hi ned,
--On Friday, July 30, 2004 8:18 AM -0700 ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com
wrote:
That suits me too. I will shortly post a list of drafts and their status
here so we can see what needs to be discussed.
Random thought: Perhaps it is time to consider forming a sieve
working group. The goals of the group would be carefullly limited to:
(1) Progressing the base sieve specification to draft. (Note that this
means no significant changes or additions.)
(2) Finishing various sieve I-Ds already on the table.
What do people think about the idea?
I've been thinking the same thing myself. I think getting to draft status
is a worthy effort and probably is best done under the auspices of a WG.
Other extensions that have wide deployment right now also ought to be part
of any WG charter.
My only issue with draft status is whether all the normative references are
also at draft. The current SIEVE RFC pre-dates the normative/non-normative
references split. However it does look like all the relevant ones are at
draft so we ought to be OK.
I am also interested in knowing if there is any interaction with marid/asrg
that we ought to consider (e.g. SIEVE tests for SPF-type information that
can be used for additional filtering). Having an official WG may help with
determining that.
--
Cyrus Daboo