On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 09:25 -0400, John Peacock wrote:
SIEVE is not just some clever scheme that Timo (or anyone else) just made up. Each library implementation may be independent, but the language and its behavior are publicly defined:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3028.html
If you don't like the limitations of Sieve (which was a deliberate choice, BTW), then maildrop and procmail are just down the hall... ;-)
I know SIEVE is a standard language defined by an RFC. I admit I do not know much about SIEVE internals, but I still think it is quite cool featurewise and like it more than adding one more MDA, be it maildrop/procmail/whatever, to the delivery pipe when I can do much more using just the dovecot LDA.
I'll do my homework on the SIEVE RFCs and come back with some hopefully more interesting and useful ideas on the subject. That said I think this is more dovecot/LDA related than SIEVE related, since we are discussing about how script execution should be hadled and organized, not about the SIEVE language itself. All you need to know from the SIEVE code is what actually happened to the message after filtering, then you can decide how tyo handle execution of the remaining scripts.
Please, prove me wrong so that I can happily say RTFM to myself :)
-- Luca Corti PGP Key ID 1F38C091 BOFH excuse of the moment: Arcserve crashed the server again.