On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 13:10 +0200, Michael Haardt wrote:
Vacation responses are not just per address, but are per address per
set of vacation command arguments.
The arguments :addresses and :days do not influence the message
content. For that reason, I suggest:
Vacation responses are not just per address, but are per address per
generated message.
as has been mentioned, this does not work too well when interacting with
the "variables" extension. the generated message will often contain the
subject of the original message etc., and therefore be unique. I
suggest
Vacation responses are not just per address, but are per address and
reason argument.
I think that makes it clearer that the intent is to consider the
verbatim unexpanded reason argument.
I agree, however, don't we also want to require that the calculation to include
the :subject argument?
I believe there was a time when we didn't want to refer to variables in the
vacation draft bevcause it was assumed variables would take much longer to
complete. That's no longer true - variables is in last call while we're still
fine tuning vacation. So how about simply referring to the variables document
and say that any hash SHOULD cover the unexpanded :subject and reason
arguments?
Ned