On November 29, 2009 10:15:55 AM -0800 Frank Cusack fcus...@fcusack.com
wrote:
Easy enough for me to patch the sieve code which is likely what I'll do.
Here it is. I decided to store the timestamp (dup) info even though
it isn't used when deciding to send a response, because
1) it saves the
On December 2, 2009 2:31:12 AM -0800 Frank Cusack fcus...@fcusack.com
wrote:
If you want to use this patch, you might want to consider using a
magic number (e.g. 999) for :days instead of 0, so that users unaware
of the magic number can't easily send unthrottled vacation responses.
Just change
On November 24, 2009 11:44:52 AM +0800 Patrick Nagel
patrick.na...@star-group.net wrote:
Someone will probably ask why an auto reply to the same person more than
once a day might be necessary.
In my case I want an autoresponder for a shared email account. info@
Your message has been
On November 24, 2009 11:44:52 AM +0800 Patrick Nagel
patrick.na...@star-group.net wrote:
set 'days' to 1, there was an outcry by other project managers that the
contacts would probably not read the auto reply on the first time, or
forget about it immediately, and then send more mails during the
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:54 PM, Patrick Nagel wrote:
Shouldn't that be more like:
reject this guy is gone;
keep;
Yes, that was my first proposal, but that was also rejected harshly by
the other project managers. They wanted to have some transit time in
which the
On 11/23/2009, Patrick Nagel (patrick.na...@star-group.net) wrote:
Yes, that was my first proposal, but that was also rejected harshly by
the other project managers. They wanted to have some transit time in
which the replacement guy would still access the leaving guy's mailbox.
They felt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Charles,
On 2009-11-24 19:27, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 11/23/2009, Patrick Nagel (patrick.na...@star-group.net) wrote:
Yes, that was my first proposal, but that was also rejected harshly by
the other project managers. They wanted to have some
On 11/24/2009 6:27 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 11/23/2009, Patrick Nagel (patrick.na...@star-group.net) wrote:
Yes, that was my first proposal, but that was also rejected harshly by
the other project managers. They wanted to have some transit time in
which the replacement guy would still
On 11/24/2009, Patrick Nagel (patrick.na...@star-group.net) wrote:
2. Add the x-managers account to your replacements email client, so they
can check it as well as theirs.
2. is what we did.
In either case you could also enable the vacation message notification
if you like, but once per day
On 11/24/2009, Thomas Harold (thomas-li...@nybeta.com) wrote:
3. (slightly different) Have the vacation auto-reply set and also use
the sieve redirect method after the vacation message gets processed?
redirect :copy newmana...@example.com;
Different how? Thats was my #1 option, combined with
Fire the new manager, eh?
Now you need to keep TWO old addresses working for the same position!
Stop compounding the issue! ;)
Thomas Berezansky
Merrimack Valley Library Consortium
Quoting Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com:
On 11/24/2009, Patrick Nagel
Hello all,
I am trying to get my vacation messages to work correctly. In general it
works like how I want, and replies when a message is arived to for
example i...@domain.com, but I have some problems to get my vacation
message to work on catch-all boxes. Is there an option to for example
On 11/23/2009 01:19 PM Rene Bakkum wrote:
Hello all,
I am trying to get my vacation messages to work correctly. In general it
works like how I want, and replies when a message is arived to for
example i...@domain.com, but I have some problems to get my vacation
message to work on
On 11/23/2009, Pascal Volk wrote:
No, a 'Catch-all-vacation' reply is not possible.
And is a horrible idea anyway...
On 11/23/2009 7:19 AM, Rene Bakkum wrote:
Hello all,
I am trying to get my vacation messages to work correctly. In general it
works like how I want, and replies when a message is arived to for
example i...@domain.com, but I have some problems to get my vacation
message to work on catch-all
Thanks for all the response.
I understand the desire to have a catch-all address, I used to do it
myself a few years ago. But the aggravation eventually caused me to
reevaluate whether it was worth all of the dictionary attack spam. So
I setup aliases in postfix for all of the addresses
On November 23, 2009 1:19:00 PM +0100 Rene Bakkum rene.bak...@gmail.com
wrote:
Is there an option to for example
auto-reply on every mail that is sendto @domain.com?
The part of this question that was overlooked is on every mail.
It would be nice if '0' days meant respond to every message.
Rene Bakkum wrote:
I don't like catch-all addresses either, and I have almost never used
them myself. But our customers seems to like them sometimes, so I can't
ignore their wishes.
You can't do it with Sieve 'vacation'. Listing the exact address is
required.
~Seth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 2009-11-24 00:38, Frank Cusack wrote:
On November 23, 2009 1:19:00 PM +0100 Rene Bakkum
rene.bak...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there an option to for example
auto-reply on every mail that is sendto @domain.com?
The part of this question that
On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:44 PM, Patrick Nagel wrote:
Someone will probably ask why an auto reply to the same person more than
once a day might be necessary. This is why I needed it:
A project manager was leaving the company, and the contacts writing him
had to be informed that they should write
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Timo,
On 2009-11-24 11:50, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:44 PM, Patrick Nagel wrote:
Someone will probably ask why an auto reply to the same person more than
once a day might be necessary. This is why I needed it:
A project
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 2009-11-24 11:58, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:54 PM, Patrick Nagel wrote:
Shouldn't that be more like:
reject this guy is gone; keep;
Yes, that was my first proposal, but that was also rejected harshly
by the other
On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:10 PM, Patrick Nagel wrote:
Ah, but that's why I had the keep there! The reject message of
course could have been nicer and said how the guy is gone but this
address will be read for a bit longer but anyway stop sending mail
here.
Oh... yeah. I never got past the
23 matches
Mail list logo
