-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Loren Wilton writes:
> >> oh good, so you've changed your mind since
> >> http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id781#c3  then ;)
> 
> >Somewhat.  I still think it should be a plugin.
> 
> There's a problem with plugins I hadn't realized when they were
> originally being advertized as the universal solution to oddball
> rules.  The problem is that they aren't.
> 
> Anyone can write a jive rule, if allow_user_rules is set.  But nobody
> but the system administrator can install a plugin.  And it seems that
> even invocations of a plugin aren't supposed to show up in the
> user_prefs file, even with allow_user_rules.  So to be useful here
> (for the general case, which is what interests me) this would have to
> be a plugin that effectively exported a new rule base name, and the
> plugin would then take a general re against that base type.
> 
> Which is the same as inventing a new rule base type, except that not as many 
> people will be able to use it.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  could you add some examples?

- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFB4yycMJF5cimLx9ARAhEuAJ4klZ5AO0iSpMPZ2UtESkN26xX+iACgtyyG
6uGqWL2y8o0ozYhB5hnrjQE=
=J/yK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to