On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 08:41:41AM -0700,
ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
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?
That's for sure.
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?
I would appreciate that. Sieve has gotten the critical mass that more
and more systems will offer it soon, and by referecing variables, we
could avoid a repetition of this discussion next year.
Btw: The unexpected may happen and suddenly everybody is happy with the
vacation extension draft. ;-) I am currently working on the Exim code
and asked, because it was the last open issue for me.
Michael