Hi,
Is Seive unsuitable for implementation of vacation? Why?
Magnus
Paul J Stevens wrote:
Ilja Booij wrote:
Good idea about the database structure having to be fixed before 2.0.
We should compile a list of features that auto replies should have.
I'm not too familiar with the features of vacation. I'll do some
reading on that right away.
In that case auto_reply-done-correctly should be postponed and targeted
at 2.1 or later. The actual features are unclear, the optimal schema
structure is undefined. Both together make this feature a no-go for what
should be a feature-frozen bugfix-only development cycle. It'll simply
take too long to get this right to hold off 2.0. I'll be off on a
holiday next weekend, and I assume other will be away as well for the
summer.
I'd go for a flag like we use elsewhere in DBMail (not because it's
better, but because we use it there)
alter table auto_replies add column active_flag tinyint(1) not null
default 0 after auto_reply_idnr;
alter table aliases add column auto_reply_idnr not null default 0
after client_idnr;
Sounds good at first sight [sic]. But at the very least we want to
prevent multiple entries for the same alias pointing to different
auto_reply_idnr-s
As for the other features in your script that use "repeating items",
such as ignoring certain senders, that would of course have to go
either in the dbmail config file as a delimited list or in accessory
tables. This, however, could probably be put off until 2.1 more
easily, since one could always configure a "mailing list only" alias
and never have an auto-reply activated for that address.
I really don't see why such a list should be parameterized. All we want
to prevent is loops to mailinglists etc, and ignore mail from daemon in
general. Those are easily caught and should not be left to the
incompetencies of users. Mailingloops are a great evil, and any loops
originating from dbmail will reflect poorly on dbmail even if the users
is at fault.
Does vacation have such a list, or does it use certain rules for not
sending auto_replies?
Vacation does allow you to seed the database with addresses you want to
ignore apart from daemons. That would be useful. But a sane baseline
should always be in place, imo.
